Emily Garland v Scott Tackaberry operating as Grape and Grain

Garland v. Tackaberry
Instead, I was offered anecdotes, which I do not accept as a sufficient foundation to
supplement the award of damages for injury to dignity, feelings, or self‐respect.
Exemplary damages
[31] No party alleged malice or recklessness to be involved in the contravention, so,
pursuant to s. 43(2)(d) of the Code, I make no award for exemplary damages.
Public interest remedies
[32] Pursuant to s. 43(2)(a) and (e), the Commission requested that I order the
respondent to attend and satisfactorily complete a workshop on harassment in the
workplace within one year of the date of this decision.
[33] The Commission also sought an order that the respondent provide to every new
and future employee the business’ policy on harassment in the workplace. In addition,
those employees should receive training to ensure that they understand the meaning
and implementation of that policy.
[34] Finally, to the extent that the respondent’s harassment policy designates a person
independent of the business as the contact person for reporting instances of harassment,
the Commission requested that I direct the respondent to provide all then‐current
employees with contact information for that designated person.
[35] In the circumstances of this complaint, all of these requested remedies are just
and appropriate, and I make all of these requested orders.
Decision and order
[36] For the reasons set out above, the complaint is allowed, and I order as follows:
1. The respondent shall pay the complainant within 45 days of the date of
this decision the sum of $7,750.00 as damages for injury to dignity,
feelings, or self‐respect;
2. The respondent shall attend and satisfactorily complete a workshop on
harassment in the workplace within one year of the date of this decision;
3. The respondent shall provide to every new and future employee the
business’ policy on harassment in the workplace. In addition, the
10