A corporate controller for a small consumer loans company in Kamloops has been awarded ten months notice, despite only being employed for three and a half years. In making the July award, the British Columbia Supreme Court took into account the controller’s senior position, a steady pattern of rising compensation during her employment and her age, 56.

Glenna Ellerbeck, a certified management accountant, sued her former employer, the Speedy Cash Group, after being terminated with 10.5 weeks pay in lieu of notice. At the end of her employment she was making close to $110,000, up from $90,000 when she was hired. Her benefits included five weeks vacation and matching contributions to a group RRSP. The costs of professional dues, a cell phone and laptop computer were also picked up by the employer.

The decision does not note any discord between Ellerbeck and her employer until a new president was hired in August, 2011. Ellerbeck had been an unsuccessful candidate for the position. “The evidence indicates that [the two] had difficulties,” the decision says. In February, 2012 Ellerbeck was dismissed. In addition to 10.5 weeks of salary, she also received more than $9,000 in matching benefits toward her RRSP.

Ellerbeck relied on cases that generally establish notice for employees in similar situations of between six and 12 months, depending on length of service and supervisory responsibilities.

The employer contended that the minimum statutory requirement of 2.5 weeks per year of service was sufficient, or in the alternative, that one month per year of service was the “general rule of thumb,” the decision says.

However, Justice Masuhara found that the cases relied on by the employer each involved situations that did not apply to Ellerbeck; namely, that given her age, qualifications and level of seniority, she would require more time to find a similar job.

Describing her challenge, the decision notes that Ellerbeck, “held a senior level management position. She reported directly to the president and CEO. She was the senior financial officer of the defendant’s organizations which in large measure are in financial services. The organizational chart and her responsibilities and activities evidence her senior level responsibilities. I do not accept the defendants’ characterization that Ms. Ellerbeck only had “moderate” level responsibilities. I would note that Ms. Ellerbeck was a candidate for president.”

The decision also notes that Ellerbeck made extensive efforts to find another position, both at lower pay and in other provinces and cities, without success. While the employer had argued that Ellerbeck had “unreasonably limited herself in not seeking work as a bookeeper,” the decision says, Masuhara concluded that she had no such obligation, noting “She is seeking work in her area of expertise which has been developed over many years.” The award was therefore not reduced on the basis of failure to mitigate her damages.