Fired From a Bank, Airline or Telecom? You Can Ask for Your Job Back, and Severance Does Not Buy Out That Right

First question: are you federally regulated?

This decides which entire statute governs your job, and it turns on the industry rather than the size of the employer. Section 167(1) applies Part III of the Code to employment in or in connection with the operation of any federal work, undertaking or business. In practice that means banks, airlines and airport operations, telecommunications and broadcasting, railways, shipping, interprovincial and international trucking, grain elevators, uranium mining, most First Nations employers, and federal Crown corporations.

If that is you, the Ontario ESA does not apply to your employment at all, and advice written for provincially regulated employees will be wrong in specific and expensive ways. Roughly nine in ten Ontario workers are provincial; this article is for the other one. We set out the wider differences in federally regulated employee rights in Ontario.

The three eligibility gates

That last distinction is worth pausing on, because employers blur it. Section 167(2) removes managers, superintendents or persons exercising management functions from Division I (hours of work). Section 167(3) removes only managers from Division XIV (unjust dismissal). A job title with the word manager in it is not the test either way; what matters is what you actually did and what real authority you held over people and decisions.

The provision employers hope you have not read

The standard move on a federal termination is to hand over notice and severance under Divisions X and XI and treat the matter as closed. Section 240(1.01) addresses that directly. For greater certainty, the fact that an employer complies with Divisions X and XI does not affect the employee's rights under this Division, and does not prevent the Board from deciding that the dismissal was unjust or from making any order under s. 242(4), including a reinstatement order.

So a compliant severance payment is not a defence to an unjust dismissal complaint. What it can do is reduce the compensation ordered: s. 242(5) provides that in making a compensation order the Board may take into account any amount already paid under s. 230(1) or s. 235(1). Money paid is credited. The right itself survives.

This is also the practical reason to be careful with a release. The statute preserves your rights against mere compliance; a signed full and final release is a different instrument entirely, and it is usually drafted to end everything. Do not treat the two as the same thing.

What does 'unjust' actually mean here?

It does not mean 'dismissed without enough notice'. In *Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.*, 2016 SCC 29, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the unjust dismissal scheme in Division XIV displaces the ordinary common law rule that an employer may dismiss without cause simply by giving notice. A federal employer generally needs a reason that withstands scrutiny, not just a cheque.

That is a genuinely different starting point from Ontario's, where a without-cause dismissal is lawful provided proper notice is paid. It is the reason the federal remedy is worth so much more than its dollar value suggests, and the reason employers settle these complaints.

The two bars: when the Board cannot consider your complaint

Section 242(3.1) is where otherwise good complaints die, and both limbs deserve attention rather than a gloss:

• s. 242(3.1)(a): you were laid off because of lack of work or the discontinuance of a function. This is the employer's main answer to an unjust dismissal complaint, and it is a question of fact. Whether the function genuinely discontinued, and whether the selection of you was genuine, are both live.
• s. 242(3.1)(b): a procedure for redress has been provided under Part I or Part II of the Code, or under any other Act of Parliament. If another federal statute gives you a route for the same grievance, this one closes.

There is also an election in s. 240(1.1): you cannot make an unjust dismissal complaint if you have made a complaint based on substantially the same facts under s. 246.1(1) or s. 247.99(1), unless that complaint has been withdrawn. Choosing the wrong federal door first can close this one, so map the options before filing anything.

Ninety days, and why extensions rarely save you

Section 240(2) requires the complaint to be made within ninety days from the date of dismissal. Section 240(3) permits the Head to extend that period only in narrow circumstances: where the Head is satisfied that a complaint was made within the period to a government official who had no authority to deal with it but whom the complainant believed had that authority, or in circumstances prescribed by regulation.

Ninety days is short, and it runs while you are negotiating a package, while you are waiting for a lawyer's opinion, and while you are deciding whether to make a fuss. Diarize it from the dismissal date on the day you are dismissed.

What actually happens after you file

1. 1.You file the complaint in writing with the Head (s. 240(1)).
2. 2.The Head must endeavour to assist the parties to settle it (s. 241(2)). A large share of these complaints resolve here.
3. 3.If it does not settle within a period the Head considers reasonable, you make a written request that it be referred to the Board, and the Head delivers the complaint, the employer's written reasons and related documents (s. 241(3)).
4. 4.⚠️ Do not go quiet. Under s. 241(4) and (5), if you do not reply to a written communication and at least 30 days have passed, the Head may notify you that you have 30 days to request referral, and if you do not, the complaint may be deemed withdrawn.
5. 5.The Board considers whether the dismissal was unjust and gives reasons (s. 242(3)).

What the Board can order

Section 242(4) gives three remedial powers where the Board decides a person has been unjustly dismissed. It may require the employer to pay compensation not exceeding the amount equivalent to the remuneration that would, but for the dismissal, have been paid; to reinstate the person; and to do any other like thing that it is equitable to require in order to remedy or counteract any consequence of the dismissal.

That third power is broader than people expect and has been used for things a damages award cannot reach, such as correcting a record. But reinstatement is the headline. If what you actually want is your job, this is the only Ontario-based route that can deliver it, and it is worth weighing against a civil action that can only ever produce money.

If you were just dismissed from a federal employer

1. 1.Write the 90-day date down today. It runs from the dismissal date, not from when negotiations break down.
2. 2.Send the s. 241(1) written request for reasons. Fifteen days, free, and it fixes their position early.
3. 3.Do not sign the release yet. Compliance with Divisions X and XI does not end your rights; a release may.
4. 4.Check the three gates honestly: 12 months, no collective agreement, and whether you were truly a manager under s. 167(3).
5. 5.Decide what you actually want. Reinstatement and maximum compensation pull in different directions, and the choice shapes the strategy from day one.
6. 6.Get advice before choosing a federal door, because s. 240(1.1) and s. 242(3.1)(b) can close this one if you file elsewhere first.

Federal terminations are handled by most people as if they were Ontario terminations, and that costs the remedy that matters most. If you are holding a package from a bank, airline or telecom, get it looked at against the Code, not the ESA. Start with our severance package review.

About the Author

Amir Mirza

Founder & Employment Lawyer, Mirza Law

Amir Mirza is the founder of Mirza Law and an Ontario employment lawyer acting for employees. He is licensed by the Law Society of Ontario and is a member of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association. He writes about severance, wrongful dismissal, and the rights Ontario employees have when their job ends.

See all articles