Partial Summary: The trail judge was correct in his findings. There was no implied
term in the employment contract allowing the employer to substantially change the duties
of the employee because of financial exigencies, nor was there evidence that the employer
was in fact obliged to do so because of financial problems. The employee was not required,
in mitigation, to do something the trial judge had determined she was incapable of doing.
Source: Alberta Law Reports 6 Alta. L.R. (3d) p. 12-13
If you have any information that would be helpful in the corroboration and
investigation of employment discrimination cases against Eatons email ONHR
Click here to send me information, to alert me about other cases against Eatons, to send evidence, suggestions and feedback
| Click here to return to Ontario Network for Human Rights Guestbook, Chatroom, Index and Main Page. page| Systemic Racism at Eatons| Systemic Racism in Canada and U.S.
Copyright ©1996-2001. All Rights Reserved