In July 2007, Allstate Insurance Company of Canada (hereinafter
referred to as "Allstate") sent a notice of change of
working conditions to all its insurance agents. Allstate was then
employing approximately 90 agents in Quebec.
The notice was sent 26 months prior to the implementation of the
changes, which were particularly related to their workplace and
their remuneration scheme (the Employment Agreements of the agents
and their Employee Manuals both stated that Allstate reserved the
right to modify the working conditions of the agents and their
remuneration scheme).
One of the agents, Mr. Agostino, disagreed with said changes and
resigned because he considered that he was the subject of
constructive dismissal. He thereafter filed a motion to be
authorized to institute a class action against Allstate in the name
of the agents.
In its July 3, 2013 decision1, the
Superior Court dismissed the motion, among other things on the
ground that a remedy for constructive dismissal is ultimately an
individual claim. In fact, the facts underlying a remedy for
constructive dismissal must be analyzed on a case by case basis, in
the light of the facts specific to each employee who alleges having
been the subject of a material and unilateral change of the
essential terms and conditions of his or her employment
contract.
1. Agostino v. Allstate du Canada, compagnie d'assurances, 2013 QCCS 3049
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.