Gerald was an experienced miner who was fired after just a few weeks with a new employer. After an investigation, the ministry ordered the employer to pay Gerald for 80 hours, which was the time remaining within Gerald’s probation period.

Gerald thought the order was insufficient. He contacted us.

We investigated to determine whether the ministry had proceeded reasonably and, in particular, whether it had provided adequate reasons for its decision. The ministry provided us with a copy of its complete file including handwritten notes and legal advice.

We determined the ministry had proceeded reasonably. The Chief Inspector had given Gerald multiple opportunities to share his perspective. He had conducted a reasonably thorough investigation and had interviewed staff to confirm information provided by the mining company’s management about Gerald’s work performance. Additionally, he obtained and followed legal advice, provided a reasonably detailed decision letter, and followed up orally with Gerald to further explain the decision.

We considered the complaint to be not substantiated and we closed our file. Shortly thereafter, the Chief Inspector contacted us and said that he would like to arrange a meeting to discuss ways their process could be improved. We shared information with the Chief Inspector and several of his staff about fair procedures and the things we look for when we investigate. We also provided some printed resources. We were pleased that the ministry demonstrated an interest in improving their processes, even though we had not found them deficient in the particular case we had investigated.