FAQ's Cases - Stewart McKelvey

- 20 -[130] Some of the plaintiff’s complaints were, indeed, long on generalities and short onspecifics. An example is that she was blamed for others’ errors. She was a long-term employee.Some of her complaints, such as that Roberta Pozniak had taken her clothes shopping or paid forher hair care, seemed dated as well as misguided. Other complaints, such as regarding workdistribution and prioritization and being questioned about her activities in the office seemed tosimply reflect her resentment of Ms. Pozniak’s legitimate efforts to manage the business.[131] Complaints about yelling in the office, aside from those to do with Ms. Pozniak’scommunication with the utility companies over the telephone, appeared when probed to beexaggerated, as frequent mention was made that it was really Ms. Pozniak’s tone of voice thatgot people’s attention.[132] Other comments of mine regarding the various complaints have been madeelsewhere in these reasons as each has been dealt with in turn.2011 ONSC 2148 (CanLII)[133] I accept that the defendant’s is a busy office and there are pressures of deadlinesand volumes to contend with. In addition, Roberta Pozniak’s personality and management stylemight not be to everyone’s liking. She had expectations of the staff and made them known.There is definitely an edge to how she comports herself, which she would describe as “nononsense”. Clearly, it would be uncomfortable to be on the wrong side of her. On the otherhand, her testimony about purchasing clothes or personal services for the staff, for example,reveals another dimension of her, as does a comment recorded by Dr. Beck after the plaintiff hadreturned from stress leave as follows: “Her boss seems to be making some effort to try andaccommodate her”.[134] It cannot be assumed that the plaintiff was a perfect employee and thatmanagement’s conduct towards her, so far as she objected to it, was somehow misguided. Asidefrom management’s role of running the office, both Roberta Pozniak and Walter Pozniakexpressed concerns regarding aspects of the plaintiff’s job performance. Ms. Pozniak noted, forexample, that the plaintiff spent excessive time in personal conversations. Walter referred to thenumber of mistakes that the plaintiff made. This suggests that a degree of oversight wasrequired, which the plaintiff objected to.[135] The plaintiff’s counsel noted that the plaintiff was not the only employee whoquit. Overall, this was the strongest argument that the plaintiff had been constructivelydismissed because the test is objective and this provided insight into how others, not just theplaintiff, viewed the situation. However, each employee’s circumstances were looked at moreclosely. Debbie St. Pierre’s personal relationship with her sister, Roberta Pozniak, fraught withdifficulties arising outside of the work environment, and her troubled marital situation at the timeshe quit cloud the picture such that she does not provide a clear test case. Also, she has returned