the relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in canadian dismissal cases

13
Sex Roles, Vol. 34, Nos. 7/8, 1996 The Relationship Between Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause Determination in Canadian Dismissal Cases I Terry H. Wagar 2 and James D. Grant Saint Mary's University Widespread concern has been expressed recen@ over the differential treatment of women by the courts and various arbitration and adjudication proceedings. Based on data obtained by content ana~sing 367 Canadian dismissal cases from 1980 to 1993, this study examines the relationship between the plaintiff's gender and the court's ruling regarding the existence of just cause for termination. The results indicate that female plaintiffs are more likely than men to succeed in their court action. However, in comparison with their representation in the Canadian workforce, a relatively small percentage of women are plaintiffs in wrongful dismissal actions. Possible explanations for the study's findings are discussed. While dismissal from employment is a traumatic experience, there is some evidence that men and women vary in terms of their responses to termi- nation. Phelps and Mason (1991) found that women were more likely than men to acknowledge the emotional side of losing a job and view the loss of a job as a personal rejection. However, women also tended to see the job loss as an opportunity to take stock and examine other choices and opportunities. In addition, women generally took longer going through the transition associated with job loss. In Canada, the common law principles of wrongful dismissal apply to employees not covered by a collective agreement or some other arbitration 1Funding for this study was provided by a Saint Mary's University Senate Research Grant to the first author. The very capable research assistance of Nancy Canavan and Jane MacNeil is gratefully acknowledged. 2"1"o whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Management, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 3C3. 535 0360-0025/96/0400-0535509.50/0© 1996PlenumPublishing Corporation

Upload: terry-h-wagar

Post on 14-Aug-2016

216 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Sex Roles, Vol. 34, Nos. 7/8, 1996

The Relationship Between Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause Determination in Canadian Dismissal Cases I

Terry H. Wagar 2 and James D. Grant Saint Mary's University

Widespread concern has been expressed recen@ over the differential treatment of women by the courts and various arbitration and adjudication proceedings. Based on data obtained by content ana~sing 367 Canadian dismissal cases from 1980 to 1993, this study examines the relationship between the plaintiff's gender and the court's ruling regarding the existence of just cause for termination. The results indicate that female plaintiffs are more likely than men to succeed in their court action. However, in comparison with their representation in the Canadian workforce, a relatively small percentage of women are plaintiffs in wrongful dismissal actions. Possible explanations for the study's findings are discussed.

While dismissal from employment is a traumatic experience, there is some evidence that men and women vary in terms of their responses to termi- nation. Phelps and Mason (1991) found that women were more likely than men to acknowledge the emotional side of losing a job and view the loss of a job as a personal rejection. However, women also tended to see the job loss as an opportunity to take stock and examine other choices and opportunities. In addition, women generally took longer going through the transition associated with job loss.

In Canada, the common law principles of wrongful dismissal apply to employees not covered by a collective agreement or some other arbitration

1Funding for this study was provided by a Saint Mary's University Senate Research Grant to the first author. The very capable research assistance of Nancy Canavan and Jane MacNeil is gratefully acknowledged.

2"1"o whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Management, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 3C3.

535

0360-0025/96/0400-0535509.50/0 © 1996 Plenum Publishing Corporation

Page 2: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

536 Wagar and Grant

process. An employee represented by a union usually has the option to appeal dismissal through the grievance procedure with binding arbitration as the final step in the process. Nonunion employees, however, must pro- ceed with a lawsuit against the employer in the event they feel that dis- missal was without justifiable cause. Although the number of employees suing their former employers for wrongful dismissal has risen dramatically over the past fifteen years, relatively little empirical research has focused on the common law of wrongful dismissal in Canada and we are unaware of any studies investigating the relationship between the plaintiff's gender and the determination of just cause in Canadian dismissal cases)

In a recent series of studies, Bemmels (1988abc, 199lab) found that arbitrators were more lenient toward female grievants in discipline and dis- charge arbitration cases in Canada and the United States. This result is consistent with some research of the criminal justice system (Moulds, 1980; Nagel & Hagan, 1983). The present study examines the effect of plaintiff's gender on the outcome of 367 Canadian dismissal cases in which the em- ployer argued that the discharge was warranted because of the presence of just cause.

A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE CANADIAN LAW OF WRONGFUL DISMISSAL

Canadian employees are subject to either an individual contract of em- ployment or to a collective agreement between a representative union and the employer. Employees covered by a collective agreement are required to carry grievances through a defined process which may end in binding arbi- tration. Such employees do not have access to the courts for a common law remedy except to resolve points of law arising out of the arbitration process.

While the remedies available to a discharged union worker are some- what similar in both Canada and United States, a nonunionized employee in Canada is not hired "at will". Rather, such an employee is held to have an individual contract of employment with the employer; in the event of wrongful dismissal, the individual generally must proceed by means of a lawsuit before the court. A few jurisdictions (Federal, Quebec and Nova Scotia) provide employees with specified periods of service with the op- portunity to bring their cases to an adjudication process provided under

3In two separate studies of wrongful dismissal cases, McShane (1983) and McShane and McPhillips (1987) found no evidence of gender affecting the determination of reasonable notice. However, unlike the present study, the McShane and McShane and McPhillips studies did not examine the relationship between gender and case outcome in just cause dismissal decisions.

Page 3: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 537

the relevant statutes. While dismissed employees may launch actions in either forum, they are bound by the first decision.

Under the common law of wrongful dismissal, an employee may be terminated at any time providing the employer gives reasonable notice of termination or damages in lieu of notice. The purpose of reasonable notice is to allow the employee adequate time to find alternative employment ap- propriate to the individual's status and training, subject to many additional factors such as length of service and the labor market conditions at the time of termination. Alternatively, an employee may be dismissed without notice if the employer has justifiable cause for termination.

Once a dismissed employee establishes a prima facie case of wrongful dismissal, the onus shifts to the employer who must prove (on the balance of probabilities) that the employee was dismissed for cause. An employer who is able to establish just cause is under no obligation to provide the employee with reasonable notice.

The courts may find that an employee was terminated with no cause or with cause not sufficient to justify the dismissal. Such decisions are ar- rived at after a careful examination of the employment contract which, un- like the more formal collective agreement, may be subject to terms implied by industry and business practice, the employment history, promises and expectations, and even the relative treatment and behavior of other em- ployees, among other factors. The decision, while subject to rational proc- esses and tests, relies largely on a subjective assessment. Little is known about the extent to which personal bias plays a role in the determination.

The most common grounds for terminating an employee on the basis of cause are misconduct (such as insubordination, theft or dishonesty) and incompetence (Wagar & Grant, 1993; Grant & Wagar, 1995). However, and contrary to the belief of many employers, factors unrelated to the conduct of the employee (such as adverse economic conditions, redundancy, or an employer reorganization) do not constitute grounds for dismissal.

BACKGROUND

While there is evidence that the gender of individuals may bias deci- sions in a wide variety of human resource activities including selection and placement, salary and reward allocation, performance evaluation and ap- praisal, and promotion (Dalton & Todor, 1985), we are unaware of any studies which have specifically investigated the relationship between plain- tiff's gender and the determination of just cause in Canadian dismissal cases. However, the work of scholars in the areas of criminal justice and grievance arbitration is instructive.

Page 4: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

538 Wagar and Grant

Although the study of gender effects in grievance arbitration decisions has attracted the attention of researchers in recent years, the theoretical underpinnings for most of the work are derived from the criminal justice literature--this is not surprising when one considers that it was more than a quarter of a century ago when researchers in the United States began investigating whether there was systematic discrimination in the way the judicial system treated men and women (Edwards, 1989). While a number of the criminal justice theories are relevant to both arbitration decisions and wrongful dismissal case outcomes, it should be underscored that crimi- nal justice studies reflect criminal court decisions while arbitration case de- cisions are based on third-party dispute resolution procedures and wrongful dismissal cases are based on civil court decisions.

In his studies of arbitration cases, Bemmels (1988ac) advanced two theoriesemerging from the criminology literature, both of which are based on stereotypical assumptions of female behavior. The chivalry/paternalism thesis supports a finding of more lenient treatment of female plaintiffs. Chivalrous behavior has a somewhat more positive connotation than pa- ternalism, however, in that paternalism engenders a superior/subordinate relationship in which women are seen to be child-like, helpless and in need of male protection. The evil woman thesis, on the other hand, holds that women who commit offenses violate assumptions of expected behavior. It would suggest that women are penalized for both their offenses and their deviant behavior (see, for example, Mould, 1980; Nagel & Hagen, 1983).

Experimental Studies of Arbitration Outcomes

To date, the relationship between grievant gender and arbitration out- come has been examined using both experimental and content analysis methodologies. The limited experimental studies have produced mixed re- suits when considering the impact of gender on arbitration decision making. Bigoness and DuBose (1985) had male and female undergraduate students render an arbitration decision based on a hypothetical discharge of an em- ployee for allegedly drinking alcohol at work. The results indicated that the gender of the grievant was not significant in determining the severity of the penalty and that arbitrators of the same sex as the grievant did not treat these workers more favorably. It should be noted that several writers (Bemmels, 1988a; Steen, Perrewe & Hochwarter, 1994) have observed that using undergraduate students as arbitrators may not be realistic.

In a field experiment in which 230 male arbitrators responded to a hypothetical discharge arbitration case, Bemmels (1991b) noted that arbi- trators were more likely to opt for a less severe penalty when the grievant

Page 5: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 539

was female but the gender of the grievant was not significant when con- sidering the arbitrators' causal attributions. However, when Oswald and Caudill (1991) asked practicing arbitrators (117 males and 29 females) to decide a hypothetical sexual harassment discharge case in which the gender of the grievant was manipulated, they found that case decision was not affected by the gender of the arbitrator or grievant.

Analyses of Arbitration Decisions

A number of researchers have investigated the effect of gender on the resolution of grievances and arbitration case decisions. Scott and Shadoan (1989), in an examination of 169 United States arbitration decisions, found no evidence of gender affecting case outcome. Similarly, Steen, Perrewe and Hochwarter (1994), in a recent study of more than 600 discipline and discharge cases, found no evidence of a relationship between gender of the grievant and case outcome.

In a series of studies, Bemmels examined the effect of grievant's gender on labor arbitration decisions in Alberta (1988a), British Columbia (1988b) and the United States (1988c; 1991a). There was evidence that female grievants received more lenient treatment than male grievants, although there was some variability among the findings of the studies. The greatest support for gender affecting grievance outcome comes from Bemmels' (1988a) study of 104 discharge cases in Alberta from 1981 to 1983; he found that women had their grievances sustained more often than men, received full rather than partial reinstatement more frequently when the grievance was sustained, and received shorter suspensions, on average, than male grievants.

In a subsequent analysis of 633 discipline cases in British Columbia for the years 1977 to 1982, Bemmels (1988b) found no significant gender differences regarding the likelihood of grievances being sustained or in the length of suspension imposed on grievants. However, women were more likely to receive full reinstatement when their grievances were sustained.

Bemmels (1988c) examined 1,812 discharge cases in the United States from 1976 to 1986 and analysed the effect of the gender of both the grievant and the arbitrator on case outcome. He found that female grievants were more likely to have their grievances sustained and to receive full reinstatement when the arbitrator was male. There were no significant differences between male and female grievants when the arbitrator was fe- male. Similarly, in a subsequent study of 557 suspension grievances for the years 1976 to 1986, Bemmels (1991a) concluded that while female arbitra- tors did not treat male and female grievants differently, male arbitrators were 74% more likely to sustain the grievances of female grievants.

Page 6: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

540 Wagar and Grant

As Bemmels points out, reasons other than arbitrator bias may explain the differential win rates of men and women in arbitration cases. Potential explanations for the gender effects observed in the studies include the pos- sibility that female grievants may have had stronger cases, unions may have differential policies when deciding to settle rather than pursue a grievance to arbitration, or male grievants may be more persistent in demanding that their grievance proceed to arbitration.

To sum, there is some empirical evidence from the grievance arbitration literature (particularly Bemmels, 1988abc; 199lab) suggesting that females may have a higher probability of winning their cases. However, little research has focused on civil court decisions in wrongful dismissal cases and we are unaware of any quantitative studies investigating gender effects in just cause dismissal cases. The present study was designed to investigate whether women or men have a higher probability of success in civil court when the employer dismisses an individual and argues that just cause for termination existed.

METHOD

Data Collection

The data for this study were obtained by content analysing 367 dismissal cases in Canada for the period 1980 to 1993. Cases were identified by means of an on-line data base search using Quick Law and by reviewing all relevant decisions in the All Canadian Weekly Summaries and the Canadian Abridge- ment. Consequently, the study is based on both reported and unreported wrongful dismissal decisions. In order to be included in the analysis the case had to deal with the issue of dismissal and involve an allegation on the part of the employer that the employee was discharged for just cause. Cases which dealt solely with the issue of reasonable notice were excluded from the analysis. In addition, we checked cases to see if they had been appealed; in those instances where the appellate court had overturned the lower court, we coded the cases based on the appeal court ruling.

Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in the study was the outcome of the decision. Cases were coded on the basis of whether the plaintiff (dismissed em- ployee) won his or her case (that is, the court found that the employer did not have just cause for termination) or whether the employer won (that is, the court held that the employer had sufficient reason to dismiss the em-

Page 7: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 541

ployee for cause). A win for the plaintiff employee was coded 0 and a win for the defendant employer was coded 1.

Primary Independent and Control Variables

The primary independent variable was the gender of the plaintiff (coded male = 0 and female = 1). A number of other variables were in- cluded in the study as control variables. The occupation of the plaintiff (chief executive officer or president, vice president, middle management, professional, first line supervisor, sales, clerical/blue-collar, or service) was included because of the possibility that occupational status may influence the case outcome (McShane & McPhillips, 1987; Levitt, 1992); as well, cer- tain occupational groups may have a higher proportion of female plaintiffs. In addition, the plaintiff's past record (blemished = I; unblemished = 0) was included because of the importance as a factor in determining just cause (Levitt, 1992; Wagar, 1994). 4

Time (date of decision) was coded with reference to seven two-year time periods beginning in 1980-1981; note, however, that the most recent time period (1992-1993) only includes cases from January 1, 1992 to June 30, 1993. Time was included in the analysis to examine whether trends in just cause case outcomes have changed over the fourteen years of the study. Similarly, jurisdiction (Atlantic Canadian provinces, British Columbia, Western Canada, Ontario) of the case was included to determine whether case outcomes varied across different regions of Canada. The industry structure (not-for-profit; service; and manufacturing) and size of the employer (small or less than 100 employees; medium or between 100 and 500 employees; large or between 501 and 5,000 employees, or very large or over 5,000 employees) were in- cluded because of possible differences in just cause determinations as a result of employer characteristics (Block & Stieber, 1987). 5 Finally, the reasons ad- vanced by the employer as grounds for discharge (incompetence or miscon- duct) were included because of the potential influence of the employer defense on case outcome (Levitt, 1992; Wagar, 1994) 6

4When coding blemished work record, we initially separated "related" and "unrelated" offences. However, because of the small frequency associated with unrelated offences (8 of the 367 cases), we collapsed the related and unrelated categories into a single category.

5For a number of cases, the size of the employer and industry sector could be determined from the case report. However, in several other instances it was necessary to match information contained in the case with a number of business directories.

6As one reviewer pointed out, it is important to control for the grounds for discharge; in other words, if women are more likely to be dismissed on less severe grounds, then the finding of differential win rates for men and women may be due, at least in part, to the reasons for the discharge. An examination of the data did not indicate significant differences between men and women when considering the grounds for dismissal.

Page 8: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

542 Wagar and Grant

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics relating to the 367 Canadian just cause dismissal cases are reported in Table I. As indicated in the table, employees won 61.6% of the cases in which the employer alleged that the dismissal of the individual was for just cause. With reference to the gender of the plaintiff, men were over-represented in the sample with just under 81% of the plain- tiffs being male.

As an initial step in the analysis, we cross-tabulated case outcome with plaintiff gender. The result was highly significant (Chi-square Test = 11.13; p < .01). Employers were able to prove just cause for termination in 42.6% of the cases in which the plaintiff was male and only 21.1% of the decisions involving female employees.

While the cross-tabulation results are informative, multivariate analysis allows the researcher to control for the effect of other variables on the dependent variable. Because the dependent variable (case outcome) is di- chotomous, probit estimation was used to analyse the effects of the primary independent and control variables on the probability that the employer was successful in the case. The results of the probit analysis are provided in Table II.

With reference to the gender of the plaintiff, the coefficient on female is negative and statistically significant (p < .01); that is, the probability of a woman successfully winning a wrongful dismissal just cause case is sig- nificantly higher than for a male plaintiff. In other words, the likelihood of the court finding in favor of an employer who has argued that there was just cause for dismissal is less if the plaintiff is female. 7

An important question posed both by criminal justice scholars (Ed- wards, 1989) and writers examining arbitration decisions (Steen, Perrewe & Hochwarter, 1994) is whether discrimination on the basis of gender has diminished over time. As noted previously, Steen et al. found no evidence of gender effects upon analysing a recent sample of arbitration decisions.

In order to examine whether the significant relationship between plain- tiff gender and determination of just cause was a historical artifact we ex- amined only those cases from 1988 to 1993. Similar to the results for the full sample of cases, the cross-tabulation result was highly significant (Chi- square Test = 5.94; p < .01) with employers winning 43.9% of the cases in which the plaintiff was male and only 21.6% of the decisions involving female employees. In addition, the probit estimation was rerun using only

7The marginal effect for the variable plaintiff sex (1 = female) was -.33. The marginal effect was calculated as the difference between the mean predicted probability that the dependent variable (employer victory) equals one, evaluated at plaintiff gender = 1 and plaintiff gender = 0 with all control variables evaluated at the sample mean.

Page 9: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 543

Table I. Descriptive Statistics for Canadian Just Cause Dismissal Cases

Variable Number Percent

Dependent variable Case outcome

Employee won 226 61.6 Employer won 141 38.4

Independent variables

Plaintiff's gender Female 71 19.3 Male 296 80.7

Plaintiff's occupation President/CEO 8 2.2 Vice president 37 10.1 Middle management 95 25.9 Professional 45 12.3 First line supervisor 79 21.5 Sales 36 9.8 Clerical 41 11.2 Service 26 7.1

Plaintiff's record Blemished 102 27.8 Unblemished 265 72.2

Time (date of decision) 1980-1981 26 7.1 1982-1983 35 9.5 1984-1985 73 19.9 1986-1987 73 19.9 1988-1989 64 17.4 1990-1991 61 16.6 1992-1993 35 9.5

Jurisdiction Atlantic provinces 113 30.8 British Columbia 62 16.9 Western Canada 110 30.0 Ontario 82 22.3

Industry structure Not for profit sector 64 17.4 Service sector 201 54.8 Manufacturing sector 102 27.8

Employer size Small 109 29.7 Medium 110 30.0 Large 112 30.5 Very large 36 9.8

Incompetence Yes 117 31.8 No 250 68.2

Misconduct Yes 216 59.9 No 151 40.1

Page 10: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

544 Wagar and Grant

Table IL Probit Analysis for Canadian Just Cause Dismissal Cases: Probability of an Employer Victory

Asymptotic Variable Coefficient t-Statistices

Plaintiff's gender (female) -0.876 --3.797 c

Plaintiff's occupation CEO/President -0.873 -1.443 Vice president --0.832 -2.213 b Middle management --0.707 -2.172 b Professional -0.275 -0.780 First line supervisor -0.814 -2.428 b Sales -1.069 --2.728 c Clerical --0.399 -1.135

Plaintiff's record Blemished 0.703 3.994 c

Time (date of decision) 1980-1981 0.210 0.557 1982-1983 0.213 0.629 1984-1985 -0.025 -0.085 1986-1987 0.078 0.269 1988-1989 0.065 0.213 1990-1991 0.184 0.604

Jurisdiction Atlantic provinces -0.088 -0.413 British Columbia -0.193 -0.782 Western Canada -0.124 -0.586

Industry structure Not for profit sector -0.001 --0.004 Service sector -0.579 -3.161 c

Employer size Small --0.656 --2.355 c Medium --0.606 -2.165 b Large --0.797 -2.885 c

Incompetence (yes) -0.403 -2.034 b

Misconduct (yes) 0.529 2.917 c

Constant 1.023 2.121 b

Log-likelihood -201.462

Likelihood ratio test 85.983 c

p < .10. < .10.

Cp < .10.

Page 11: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 545

those cases from 1988 to 1993. Consistent with the results reported above, the probability of an employer victory was significantly less (t = -3.02; p < .01; marginal effect of- .39) if the plaintiff was female.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study indicate that in a dismissal case in which the employer argued there was just cause for termination, courts are more likely to decide in favor of the dismissed employee. In more than 60% of the cases, the courts held that the employer did not have just cause to terminate the employee. In addition, the results suggest that the remedy of wrongful dismissal is relied on more frequently by male employees and by individuals in professional and managerial occupations.

The empirical analysis revealed that female plaintiffs are more likely than male plaintiffs to have a court rule that the employer did not have just cause for dismissal. This finding is in line with some of the gender effects research in the arbitration and criminal justice literatures. While the courts tended to rule more frequently in favor of female plaintiffs, this does not necessarily mean that there is discrimination or bias on the part of the courts. For instance, it may be that female plaintiffs had stronger cases than male plaintiffs.

Over the 1980 to 1992 period, the percentage of women working in Canada has increased from just over 40% to approximately 46% of the workforce. In addition, approximately 48% of the employees in managerial and professional positions are female compared with 38% a decade ago (Statistics Canada, 1981 & 1992). However, only 19% of the just cause wrongful dismissal cases examined in this study involved female plaintiffs.

There are several alternative explanations for the apparent unwilling- ness of women to pursue a wrongful dismissal court action. For example, women may be less likely to bring a wrongful dismissal court action unless they perceive a high probability of winning the case (Grant & Wagar, 1992). In addition, a number of women may lack the spousal and professional support systems available to men (Phelps & Mason, 1991) or do not per- ceive the justice system as fair and impartial. 8 While a successful plaintiff may receive a substantial damage award in a wrongful dismissal lawsuit, the former employee must initiate an action through the courts and it is not unusual for a case to take up to two years to be resolved. Consequently,

8The Canadian Bar Association has established the Gender Equality Task Force to examine gender issues and the law. In addition, the vast majority of female lawyers responding to a recent survey by the Law Society of Upper Canada indicated that they had been the victims of sex discrimination on the job.

Page 12: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

546 Wagar and Grant

moral and financial support are often essential if an individual is to proceed with a wrongful dismissal action.

When considering directions for future research, writings from the criminal justice literature are particularly helpful. By way of example, to what extent is labelling theory (Bickle & Peterson, 1991) relevant to wrong- ful dismissal decisions? To what degree do judges stereotype litigants? Does familial social control and economic dependency (Eaton, 1986; Daly, 1989; Crew, 1991) influence the determination of just cause for dismissal? Are familied plaintiffs more likely to succeed in a wrongful dismissal action? In short, we know very little about the factors affecting the judicial deci- sion-making process with respect to dismissal cases in civil courts.

Furthermore, several other research questions are worthy of future at- tention. For instance, are women more risk averse and less willing to pursue a wrongful dismissal action? To what extent does the support network avail- able to men and women affect the decision to pursue court action? Is plain- tiff gender a consideration in the decision by an employer to terminate an employee? Hopefully, these and other issues will be investigated in sub- sequent research.

REFERENCES

Bemmels, B. (1988a). The effect of grievants' gender on arbitration decisions. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 41, 251-262.

Bemmels, B. (1988b). Gender effects in discipline arbitration: evidence from British Columbia. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 699-706.

Bemmels, B. (1988c). Gender effects in discharge arbitration. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 42, 63-76.

Bemmels, B. (1991a). Gender effects in grievance arbitration. Industrial Relations, 30, 150-162. Bemmels, B. (1991b). Attribution theory and discipline arbitration. Industrial and Labor

Relations Review, 44, 548-562. Bickle, G. S., & Peterson, R. D. (1991). The impact of gender-based family roles on criminal

sentencing. Social Problems, 38, 372-394. Bigoness, W. J., & DuBose, E B. (1985). Effects of gender on arbitrators' decisions. Academy

of Management Jouma~ 28, 485-491. Block, R. N., & Stieber, J. (1987). The impact of attorneys and arbitrators on arbitration

awards. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 40, 543-555. Crew, B. K. (1991). Sex differences in criminal sentencing: chivalry or patriarchy? Justice

Quarter& 8, 59-82. Dalton, D. R., & Todor, W. D. (1985). Gender and workplace justice: a field assessment.

Personnel Psychology, 38, 133-151. Daly, K. (1989). Neither conflict nor labeling nor paternalism will suffice: intersections of

race, ethnicity, gender, and family in criminal court decisions. Crime and Delinquency, 35, 136-168.

Eaton, M. (1986). Justice for women?: family, courts and social control. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

Edwards, A. (1989). Sex/gender, sexism and criminal justice: some theoretical considerations. International Journal of the Sociology of the Law, 17, 165-184.

Page 13: The relationship between plaintiff gender and just cause determination in Canadian dismissal cases

Plaintiff Gender and Just Cause 547

Grant, J. D., & Wagar, "1~ H. (1992). Willingness to take legal action in wrongful dismissal cases: perceptual differences between men and women. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 1073-1074.

Grant, J. D., & Wagar, T. H. (1995). Employee misconduct and dismissal for cause: evidence from Canada. Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 4, 111-121.

Levitt, H. A. (1992). The law of dismissal in Canada (2nd ed.). Aurora, ONT: Canada Law Book.

McShane, S. L. (1983). Reasonable notice criteria in common law wrongful dismissal cases. Relations Industrielles, 38, 618-633.

McShane, S. L., & McPhiUips, D. C. (1987). Predicting reasonable notice in Canadian wrongful dismissal cases. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 41, 108-117.

Moulds, E. E (1980). Chivalry and paternalism: disparities of treatment in the criminal justice system. In S. Datesman & E Scarpitti (Eds.), Women, crime and justice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Nagel, I. H., & Hagan, J. (1983). Gender and crime: offense patterns and criminal court sanctions. In M. Tonry & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: an annual review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Oswald, S. L., & Caudill, S. B. (1991). Experimental evidence of gender effects in arbitration decisions. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Jouma~ 4, 271-281.

Phelps, S., & Mason, M. (1991). When women lose their jobs. Personnel Jouma~ 70, 64-69. Scott, C., & Shadoan, E. (1989). The effect of gender on arbitration decisions, Journal of

Labor Research, 10, 429-436. Statistics Canada. (1981, 1992). The Labour Force (Catalog 70-001). Ottawa: Statistics Canada Steen, J. E., Perrewe, P. L., & Hochwarter, W A. (1994). A reexamination of gender bias in

arbitration decisions. Labor Law Journal, 45, 298-305. Wagar, T. H. (1994). Comparative systems of wrongful dismissal: the Canadian case. Annals

of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 536, 56-69. Wagar, T. H., & Grant, J. D. (1993). Dismissal for incompetence: factors used by Canadian

courts in determining just cause for termination. Labor Law Journa~ 45, 171-177.