Alberta Human Rights Damage Awards: Chart Format
 | Alberta Human Rights Damages Summary | |
| Case | Facts Summary | Compensatory and Lost Income Awards |
| Descending Date Order | ||
| General Considerations | The rough maximum of Alberta awards was considered $10,000 until the award of $25,000 upheld in 2013 by the Alberta Court of Appeal Walsh v Mobil Oil. There was also a reprisal sum awarded in this case of $10,000. | |
| Recent sexual harassment cases have awarded sums between $35,000 to $50,000. | ||
| Complainant v 1957753 Alberta Ltd. o/a 4 Seasons Transport | Repeated unwanted sexual comments directed to complainant. 50 sexual comments within a five-week message log, indicating a toxic and hostile work environment. Remarks included references to sex toys, the complainant’s body, and sexually charged innuendos. Forced to resign. | $50,000 and lost wages for 45 weeks |
| Alb HRT | ||
| June 2025 | Suffered from depression, intensified ADHD symptoms, suicidal ideations, stomach ulcers, chronic nausea, muscle tension, migraine headaches. | |
| Silliker v Suncor | ||
| Alb HRT June 2024 | Failure to accommodate mental disability. Employee was pregnant at the time of termination. Lost income claim allowed to date of EI maternity leave. | $40,000 and lost income for 6 months. |
| Oliva, Pascoe, and Strong v Gursoy | Olivia suffered from adverse treatment due to sexual harassment and physical disability. The offensive conduct was verbal abuse and inappropriate touching. Reprisal conduct was lawsuit initiated by personal respondent alleging that the filing of the HR complaint was defamatory. It claimed damages of over $1 million plus punitive damages of $250,000. It was brought against Oliva and Pascoe. | Olivia - $75,000 and $50,000 for reprisal = $125,000 |
| Alb HRT | Pascoe was subjected to sexual harassing conduct, and reprisal. She was returning to employment after a 3 year absence, following a divorce. She was a vulnerable single mother. | Pascoe - $30,000 and $25,000 for reprisal = $55,000 |
| March 2024 | Strong was sexual harassment. She was employed for one month. Strong was pregnant and did not want to leave employment as she need EI insurable hours to allow for EI mat leave benefits. | Strong - $50,000 |
| As a note, the respondent was the former principal of the employer which had become insolvent. He represented himself at the hearing. | ||
| Total award $274,000 | ||
| Smith v Popowich | the individual respondent harassed her “on an almost daily basis” during the period. The individual respondent did this by making repeated sexual and romantic advances towards the complainant at work, which advances were refused by the complainant. The complainant also alleged that the individual respondent engaged in physical contact with her that was inappropriate and uncomfortable. The individual respondent would touch the complainant, stroke or pat her shoulder and would also place his had on the small of the complainant’s back. The individual respondent would make inappropriate and explicitly sexual comments about the complainant’s physical appearance on an almost daily basis. When the respondent’s advances were refused, the individual respondent would become angry with the complainant for refusing his advances. The individual respondent would also say things to the complainant’s co-workers, customers of the pub and other third parties that would suggest that he was in a relationship with the complainant, when that was not the case. | $35,000 |
| Alb HRT | Commission requested $25,000. | |
| November 2022 | ||
| McCharles v Jaco Line | Verbally sexually harassed and inappropriate touching | $50,000 |
| Alb HRT Oct 2022 | ||
| Euchner v EZ Motors | adverse treatment due to gender, mental disability, race and retaliation | $50,000 including reprisal damages |
| Sept 2022 AHRT | ||
| Yaschuk v Emerson Electric | Verbally sexually harassed by HR Manager. | $50,000 |
| Alb HRT | Adverse conduct had profound effect on the complainant and her allegations were not properly investigated and the conduct was not inadvertent; | |
| May 2022 | ||
| Sunshine Village Corporation v Boehnisch | Perceived physical disability of ski patroller. Failure to accommodate | $25,000 plus lost income of $54,472 |
| Alberta KB 2020 | ||
| Pratt v U of Alberta | ||
| June 2019 AHRT | termination influenced by mental disabilty | $20,000; lost income for 18 months; order of reinstatement subject to 6 month probationary period |
| Mandziak v Taste of Tuscany Ltd | Three instances of sexual harassment included touching of the buttocks; (2) an attempted kiss; and (3) a prolonged hug, that pinned Ms. Mandziak’s arms to her against Mr. Salem’s body, and touching of the upper buttocks and lower back. | $15,000 |
| May 2017 AHRT | ||
| SMS v CEP Union | Child care issues and rotational shift work | Ordered to allow regular day shifts |
| Arbitrator Award | ||
| Upheld on review | ||
| 2015 | ||
| City of Calgary vs Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 38. (arbitrator was allowed to consider common law, human rights and arbitral law, on consent) Arbitral Award 2013 | Sexual harassment | Damages for emotional harm $125,000. Past lost income from August 2011 to December 1 2013. 2 years and 5 months. Sum awarded was $200,000. No offset for LTD. |
| 5.5 years future income loss:$512,000 The maximum period for the future loss was nine years, this also being the date when the employee would be eligible to receive retirement benefits. The panel concluded a fair date to use for a future income loss would be based on a likely return to work date of July 1, 2018. The date of the decision was December 1, 2013. The future income loss was hence established to be $512,149, which was reduced by a 10% risk factor and a discounted rate for a present payment of a future income stream of 2.25%. |
||
| Clark v Bow Valley College | Issue of the availability of child care following pregnancy leave | $15,000 and lost income award of 4 months (mitigation issues) |
| AHRT 2014 | ||
| Walsh v Mobil Oil July 2013 | Gender and reprisal | $10,000 and $25,000; lost income due to adverse treatment and reprisal of $472,666 and pension loss of $139,154 and counseling bills of $10,000; Six years of lost earnings was awarded. Time period was from February 1995 to December 2000. Complainant sought lost income to intended retirement date in 2017. Tribunal found that injuries suffered in car accident of early 1994 was responsible for inability to work from 2001 forward. |
| Alberta CA | ||
| 2013 | ||
| Cowling v Alberta Alta HRT December 2012 | age | 5 years lost income, subject to 30% discount, due to tenuous context of contract; $15,000 emotional distress damages |
| Hamm v WWD Wireless | The applicant was subjected to abusive behaviour of shoulder rubbing, being blown a kiss and retaliatory conduct of a dismissal letter and false accusations contained within it | $4,500 |
| Hansen v Big Dog Express | Pregnancy | $5,000 |
| AHRT 2002 | ||