In Stride v. Syra Group et al., the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (ONSC) found that an employer’s failure to properly address workplace harassment and assault led to the wrongful dismissal of an employee. The case highlights the legal obligations employers have under Ontario law to provide a safe and respectful workplace—and the serious consequences of failing to do so.

Background: Harassment Ignored

The employee began working in January 2014 as a superintendent for a residential housing complex owned by the employer. By November 2017, her role expanded to include being on-call for emergencies.

Her work environment deteriorated when two male residents—brothers—began harassing her. The harassment was severe and included verbal threats, sexual harassment, physical assault, and even injury to her dog. She promptly reported the incidents to the employer, who advised her to contact the police. Charges were laid, and a peace bond prohibited the residents from contacting the employee or living at the property.

Despite this, the employer took little meaningful action to protect her or to address her concerns. The employee alleged that the employer failed to implement any workplace anti-violence and anti-harassment policies or training. The situation worsened when the employer permitted one of the residents to return to the complex, causing further psychological harm.

The employee began experiencing mental health challenges, including anxiety, panic attacks, irritability, and depression. During a performance review, she informed the employer she had sought hospital treatment. She subsequently took medical leave and provided a doctor’s letter recommending that she not return to work.

While she remained on medical leave, the employer dismissed her in December 2018, citing frustration of contract. They later offered reinstatement, but the employee declined, citing safety concerns and the presence of the individuals who had harassed her.

Legal Issues Considered

The Court was asked to determine:

• Whether the employment relationship had been frustrated due to the employee’s medical condition; and
• Whether the employer had breached its obligations under Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), and the Human Rights Code (Code) by failing to address the harassment.

The ONSC Decision

Medical Leave Did Not Frustrate Employment Contract

The employer argued that the contract had been “frustrated” because the employee could no longer perform her duties. The Court disagreed, finding no clear evidence that she was permanently unable to return to work. The employer had not sufficiently followed up with the employee for updated medical information, nor did it establish that her condition was permanent.

The Court concluded that the employment agreement had not been frustrated and that the employee had been wrongfully dismissed.

Refusal to Return Did Not Breach Duty to Mitigate

The employer claimed that the employee had failed to mitigate her damages by declining their offer of reemployment. The Court found otherwise.

Given the employer’s bad faith, failure to protect the employee, and the ongoing presence of her harassers, the Court determined that she was not obligated to return to a workplace where she felt unsafe and unsupported.

Employer Breached Legal Duty to Address Harassment

The Court found that the employer had breached multiple statutory duties, including:

• Failing to investigate the harassment and assault experienced by the employee;
• Failing to implement a workplace violence and harassment policy or conduct appropriate training;
• Failing to provide accommodations or protections following the incidents; and
• Allowing one of the residents—despite a peace bond prohibiting contact—to return to the property.

The Court emphasized that under the Code, employers have a duty to ensure a work environment free from harassment, including harassment by third parties such as tenants.

The employer’s failure to act contributed to the employee’s mental health deterioration and constituted a violation of its common law and statutory obligations.

Damages Awarded

The Court awarded the employee:

• Eight months’ notice of termination (including continued benefits);
• $125,000 in damages for breaches under the ESA, OHSA, and Code; and
• $50,000 in moral damages for the emotional harm caused by the employer’s bad faith and failure to address the harassment.

💡 Ontario employers are legally obligated to protect workers from harassment—including harassment by third parties like tenants. Failure to act can result in significant financial and reputational consequences.

Key Takeaways for Employers

1. Employers Must Prevent and Address Harassment Proactively

Workplace harassment policies are not optional. Employers must create clear anti-harassment policies, provide regular training, and take all complaints seriously. Swift and thorough investigations are essential.

2. Employers Must Accommodate Mental Health Needs

When an employee discloses mental health challenges, particularly those arising from workplace incidents, employers have a duty to accommodate. This may include modified duties, flexible work arrangements, or medical leave.

3. Exercise Caution When Dismissing Employees on Leave

Employers must not assume frustration of contract without strong medical evidence. Before proceeding with termination, they must request updated medical information, inquire about potential accommodations, and explore return-to-work options.

Conclusion

This case serves as a cautionary tale for employers: failing to protect employees from harassment and failing to respond appropriately can lead to substantial legal liability. Ensuring a safe workplace is both a legal and moral responsibility—and one that should never be taken lightly.

This blog is provided as an information service and summary of workplace legal issues.

This information is not intended as legal advice.