Should CERB payments impact dismissal damages?

A recent case shed light on employer obligations post-termination

Should CERB payments impact dismissal damages?

In a recent ruling, the Ontario Superior Court found that a terminated employee who was in receipt of Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) should be paid the same amount in wrongful dismissal damages regardless.

Iriotakis v Peninsula Employment Services Limited revolved around the case of a worker who was dismissed without cause in March of last year. After their termination, the employee registered for CERB payments. In a twist, the employer wanted the Court to seriously consider the amount the employee was receiving in CERB payments when deciding how much damages to award. However, the Court did not agree – instead ruling that CERB should not impact any damage payment owed by the employer.

In a statement released by The Ontario Superior Court, the judge ruled that: “I agree with the defendant that CERB cannot be considered in precisely the same light as Employment Insurance benefits when it comes to calculating damages for wrongful dismissal. CERB was an ad hoc programme and neither employer nor employee can be said to have paid into the program or ‘earned’ an entitlement over time beyond their general status as taxpayers of Canada. The level of benefit paid (approximately $2,000 per month) was considerably below the base salary previously earned by the plaintiff to say nothing of his lost commission income.

“On balance and on these facts, I am of the view that it would not be equitable to reduce Mr. Iriotakis’ entitlements to damages from his former employer by the amount of CERB given his limited entitlements from the employer post-termination relative to his actual pre-termination earnings.  I decline to do so.”

So, what does this mean for employers? Well, moving forward CERB will not be taken into much consideration when it comes to awarding post-termination damages. CERB payments aren’t the same or equivalent to EI benefits – as such the Court is unlikely to consider these payments as deductable from mitigation damages.