In the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (the “BCHRT”) decision of Mr. T v. Silver Bullet Solutions 2025 BCHRT 141, the BCHRT found that the employee’s criminal convictions were a factor in the employer’s decision to terminate his employment and the employee’s convictions were unrelated to his employment. As the employer breached section 13 of the B.C. Human Rights Code, the BCHRT ordered the employer to pay the worker $10,000 as compensation for injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect, post-judgment interest and to stop committing the same breach.
Background
The employee worked at the employer for seven days as a “Product Support Specialist”. During this period, the employer (founded by two individuals) learned that the employee had two prior criminal convictions that had not been disclosed to them during its hiring process.
In 2014, the employee robbed a bank. In addition, while the employee was waiting for trial, he was charged with obstruction of justice for communicating with a witness. The employee was convicted and jailed in 2016 but he subsequently breached his probation, and he was sent back to jail in 2017. The employee raised that, at the time, he had an undiagnosed mental illness. As a result of his criminal convictions, the employee legally changed his name in 2020 because he found that people were treating him differently when they searched online for his name.
When the employee applied for his position with the employer, he used his new name instead of his name under which he had been convicted. As part of the employer’s hiring process, they interviewed the employee and asked if he had any criminal convictions to which the employee said “No.” This was important to the employer because the “Product Support Specialist” position was situated in their home where their children would be present.
After starting his employment with the employer, the employer experienced interactions with the employee that were concerning to them. In addition, other staff members indicated to the employer that the employee was not focused on his training. Shortly before terminating the employee’s employment, the employer discovered the employee’s prior criminal convictions and informed the employee that because of his criminal convictions they couldn’t have him working in their house.
The employee argued that his prior criminal convictions were unrelated to his employment. The employer argued that they had decided to terminate the employee’s employment for poor performance prior to learning about his criminal convictions. In addition, the employer argued that while the employee’s criminal record was not a factor in the termination of his employment in the alternative the fact of the employee’s criminal convictions were related to his employment. The employee’s criminal convictions should have been disclosed to them because there was the potential of the employee accessing banking and private information of the employer’s clients and because they had concerns related to the safety of their children.
Issues
The issues in this case were 1. whether the employee’s criminal convictions were a factor in the employer’s decision to terminate his employment and 2. whether the employee’s criminal convictions were unrelated to his employment at the employer.
Findings
The BCHRT found that the employee’s criminal convictions were a factor in the employer’s decision to terminate his employment and his convictions were unrelated to his employment. As such, it ordered the employer to compensate the employee for injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect. However, the BCHRT denied the employee’s claim for wage loss because it found that the employee’s employment would have been terminated regardless of the employee’s prior convictions. It noted that the employer did not raise a defence of bona fide occupational requirement as justification for its conduct. In other words, the employer did not argue there was a legitimate job-related purpose for its conduct in terminating the employee’s employment.
Key Takeaways
As the above decision reminds us, discrimination in employment is not just a moral issue but a legal issue. Employees who have any past criminal convictions should be cautious of not being honest to their employers. Employers should also be cautious when terminating an employee’s employment based on an employee’s criminal record.
If you have any workplace law issues or are trying to navigate the BC Human Rights Tribunal process, please reach out to Tiffany Lee at [email protected].
