Bigger is not always better.

Over time, in some industries, employment contracts have lengthened from a few pages to something that would require a small binder.

A recent decision may represent good news for employees terminated from large multinational corporations, particularly in the tech sector.

In Boyle v. Salesforce.com, Mr. Boyle a 49-year-old senior success engineer, sought damages from Salesforce, a large multinational corporation that provides customer relationship management software.

Salesforce took the position that Mr. Boyle signed a contract wherein he agreed that he was not entitled to further damages. Salesforce relied on its robust 100-page contract that was standardized across many jurisdictions instead of being tailored to Mr. Boyle’s province of Ontario.

The company argued that if Mr. Boyle had questions, he was at liberty to contact Salesforce’s legal department.

Justice Lisa Brownstone ordered Salesforce to pay Mr. Boyle eight months of notice. In her ruling, she found that an employee could not reasonably know what his entitlements were prior to signing the contract and that it was unreasonable for the employee to be expected to contact the legal department for an explanation.

Justice Brownstone ultimately found that the contract was not compliant with the Employment Standards Act, 2000.

Salesforce also argued that Mr. Boyle was not entitled to bonus based on its bonus policy. The bonus policy stated that an employee had to be employed at the date of payout of the bonus or the employee would not be entitled to it. Salesforce stated that that the bonus policy was available on its intranet, that there were numerous internal articles posted about the bonus policy and that Salesforce employees were asked to review and acknowledge Salesforce policies, including its bonus policy, on an annual basis.

Justice Brownstone held however that Mr. Boyle was entitled to bonus earned to the date of termination and over the eight-month notice period. The contract, though lengthy, did not append the bonus plan and there was no proof that Mr. Boyle executed bonus entitlements. This was fatal to the Salesforce’s argument.

Companies must adequately bring their bonus policies, including provisions limiting entitlement to bonus at termination, to the attention of their employees if they seek to rely on them.

In the hopes of making processes more efficient, companies are often tempted to take a one-size-fits-all approach and standardize their employment contracts across many jurisdictions and for many employees. This case is illustrative that employers do so at their own peril. It can be more expensive to cut corners with your contracts.

I was happy to argue this case with my co-counsel Shelby Matthews.

Have a workplace issue? Maybe I can help! Email me at sunira@worklylaw.com and your question may be featured in a future column.

• Share this post: