Water, Simply Pure Ltd. v. Brian Jensen and Ministry of Labour
0424-01-ES Water, Simply Pure Ltd., Applicant v. Brian Jensen and Ministry of Labour, Responding Parties.
Employment Practices Branch File No. 53001174
BEFORE: Mary Ellen Cummings, Alternate Chair.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 2, 2001
1This is an employer appeal with respect to an Order to Pay of an Employment Standards Officer.
2On July 20, 2001, the employer and the employee entered into Minutes of Settlement. The Minutes appear to reflect a compromise; the employee is to receive some of the money the Officer ordered and the rest is to be refunded to the employer.
3In the Minutes of Settlement, the parties have requested that the Ministry of Labour disburse the funds that have been paid into trust, in accordance with their settlement. The Minutes state that the settlement “…disposes of all issues in dispute” and asks the Board to terminate the application.
4On July 21, 2001, that is, the day after the Minutes were signed, the Board received a letter from the employer, indicating that it now believed, after consultation with a police officer, that it had the basis to bring both a criminal and civil case against the employee for theft. It does not appear that these are new allegations. The employer had initially submitted that the employee was not entitled to termination pay because he was guilty of theft. The Officer concluded that the events described did not amount to “wilful misconduct”. Further, the employer’s application for review of the Order to Pay sets out in considerable detail a number of occurrences which the employer considered amounted to theft or other serious wrongdoing that would disentitle the employee from receiving termination pay.
5However, the parties then came to a resolution, as set out in the Minutes of Settlement, to which they affixed their signatures, and on which they asked both the Board and the Ministry of Labour to act. It seems that a day later, the employer has had a change of heart. It asks the Board to overturn the settlement or withhold paying the settlement until “…a decision is reached on this new information”.
6The Board is not inquiring further into this application. There is no dispute that the employer entered into the Minutes of Settlement. I see no reason why the Board should decline to honour its terms. The employer had ample opportunity to get advice, weigh its options, and decide to settle or litigate. But once a party has signed Minutes of Settlement, it is simply too late to change its mind. If the Board permitted parties to resile from their agreements because they sought another opinion, or gave the matter more thought, there would be no incentive to settle, because no party could be sure that a settlement was final.
DISPOSITION
7Having regard to the Minutes of Settlement, the Board directs the Director Employment Standards to pay $ 825.00 of the monies held in trust to the employee and return $1,463.00 to the employer. The administrative fee of $228. 80 is retained by the Government of Ontario. This matter is terminated.
“Mary Ellen Cummings”
for the Board