Vancouver 22-Mar- 1 6 I?i?Eo 1 FORM 2 (RULE 3-3 No. S-161989 Vancouver Registry In the Supreme Court of British Columbia Between: MANDALENA LEWIS Plaintiff and WESTJET AIRLINES LTD. Defendant RESPONSE TO CIVIL CLAIM Filed by: WestJet Airlines Ltd. (the ?Defendant?) Part 1: RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF CIVIL CLAIM FACTS Division 1 - Defendant?s Response to Facts 1. The facts alleged in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim are admitted. 2. The facts alleged in paragraphs 4 through 56 of Part1 of the Notice of Civil Claim are denied. Division 2 - Defendant?s Version of Facts Parties 1. The Defendant is a Canadian commercial airline with its head of?ce in Calgary, Alberta. Its af?liate, WestJet, an Alberta Partnership, employs in excess of 11,000 employees (?WestJetters?). In this response, WestJet Airlines Ltd. and its af?liate WestJet, an Alberta Partnership, are collectively referred to as ?WestJet?. 2. The Plaintiff, Mandalena Lewis (?Lewis?), is a former WestJet ?ight attendant and former employee of WestJet, an Alberta Partnership. 07/20l0 Page 1 WestJet Culture and Principles 3. WestJet is a Canadian company founded in 1996 that has grown into a successful international airline. There are approximately 2,700 ?ight attendants included in the more than 11,000 WestJetters employed by WestJet. WestJet places enormous value in its people. Almost all WestJetters are shareholders of the company. WestJet has received numerous awards celebrating WestJet as a top Canadian employer. After claiming top spot in Waterstones' study of Canada's 10 Most Admired Corporate Cultures for four years, WestJet was inducted into its Hall of Fame in 2010. In 2012/2013 WestJet was ranked by Randstad as Canada?s Most Attractive Employer. Aon Hewitt recognized WestJet as one of the Best Employers in Canada in 2010, 2012 and 2015. WestJet cultivates a spirit of collaboration, teamwork and ownership amongst its people. WestJet discourages hierarchy amongst WestJetters, including between pilots and ?ight attendants. Care is a key component of WestJet?s culture, vision and values. WestJet has a highly regarded Special Assistance Team. Hundreds of WestJetters across the organization are trained to respond and provide care in medical emergencies or catastrophic events for both employees and guests. Sa 8 First 7. Safety is a core value at WestJet. WestJet?s safety promise is posted in all WestJet work environments. In addition, the Code highlights WestJet?s commitment to safety over all other considerations. As part of its safety mandate, WestJet has strict rules regarding the consumption of alcohol on duty and prior to shift. Transport Canada regulations require that pilots abstain from drinking for a minimum of 8 hours before their scheduled ?ight times. WestJet?s own regulations are more restrictive and require pilots to abstain from drinking for 11 hours before any scheduled ?ight. The airline industry is regulated by Canadian Aviation Regulations as stipulated by Transport Canada. CARS regulation 602.3 regulates consumption of drugs and alcohol by crew members prior to flying. WestJet?s Company Operations Manual and Flight Attendant Manual show how the standards set by regulation are exceeded and promulgated to frontline crews. In addition, WestJet has an Alcohol and Drug Policy which provide standards and guidelines to minimize risk and provide a safe and healthy workplace free of any negative effects associated with alcohol or other drug use. WestJet Policies 10. West] etters are required to abide by the WestJet Code of Business Conduct (the ?Code?) and the principles set forth in the Code are conditions of each WestJetter?s employment. 07/2010 2 11 12. 13. 14. . The Code outlines WestJet?s expectation that WestJetters conduct themselves with integrity both on and off the job as follows: We expect all WestJetters to be conscious of WestJet?s reputation as well as their own, and to conduct themselves with the same high degree of integrity off the job as is expected of them on the job. The Code prohibits harassment and discrimination at WestJet and articulates that each WestJetter has the right to expect treatment in the workplace that is equitable and respectful. WestJet is committed to providing a safe and respectful work environment for all employees and guests. WestJet promotes a culture of respect and equality. WestJet?s Respect in the Workplace Policy has the objective of ensuring all employees are aware of the seriousness with which WestJet views harassment, discrimination, sexual harassment, and misuse of authority. WestJet?s Workplace Violence and Prevention Policy has the objective of facilitating an environment free from violence or threats of violence, and provides for immediate investigation into any complaint of workplace violence. Internal Employee Association 15. 16. Since 1999, WestJetters have had the support of the Pro?Active Communications Team which is an independent employee organization. PACT is an internal, non- registered Employee Association, made up of elected WestJetters who are engaged in business matters between WestJetters and all levels of leadership of WestJet. PACT is not a trade union. Since its inception, PACT has been an integral part of WestJet?s culture and has provided a forum that has allowed employee concerns to be heard. WestJet?s relationship with PACT is the foundation of WestJet?s employee relations. PACT currently has six sub-groups, including the WestJet Pilots Association which represents the interests of the approximately 1200 pilots, and the Flight Attendant Association Board which represents the approximately 2700 WestJet ?ight attendants. Internal Dispute Resolution 17. 18. At all material times, WestJet has had in place a process by which employees may raise concerns or misunderstandings that arise in the workplace. WestJet is committed to ensuring that WestJetters have appropriate processes through which to raise any concerns they may have. In 2008, WestJet introduced the Guaranteed Fair Treatment Policy and Process (the The GFT enabled an employee to raise a complaint whenever there was dissatisfaction with a WestJet policy, promise, procedure or guideline. Any kind of disagreement or difference of opinion between WestJet and its employees could be raised in this forum. 07/2010 3 19. The provided the employee with representation through the applicable sub?group of PACT, including the WJPA and FAAB. A complaint under this policy engaged a process that included three potential levels of appeal for the employee if they were not satis?ed with an outcome and provided WestJetters with an avenue to raise their concerns to the highest level of WestJet?s management. The ?nal level of appeal was to an Executive Vice President. 20. In May 2015, WestJet implemented a Dispute Resolution Process (the which replaced and enhanced the Guaranteed Fair Treatment Policy and Process. Under the DRP WestJetters continue to have an avenue to raise complaints to WestJet management. 21. In addition to the internal dispute resolution process, since 2004 WestJet has had in place an independently managed whistleblower hotline through which employees can report any concern on an anonymous basis. In 1' hr Crew 22. WestJet encourages employment based team building among all WestJetters, including the in?ight crew, consisting of pilots and ?ight attendants. WestJet trains its in?ight crew to provide a positive, fun, and caring experience for WestJet guests. 23. The Code sets out WestJet?s corporate values and standards for the manner in which WestJetters are required to treat each other, including: 0 We are positive and passionate about everything we do. 0 We take our jobs seriously but not ourselves. I We are friendly and caring toward our people and guests, and we treat everyone with respect. a We are fun, friendly and caring. 24. In?ight crew members are based in a particular location but, as part of their regular ?ying schedules, stop at WestJet?s various destinations for periods of time during which they are off duty. These off duty hours occur during the day as well as overnight (referred to as ?Layovers?). WestJet?s practices in arranging Layovers, including placing ?ight crews at the same hotel, are consistent with industry standards. 25. WestJet does not require, promote, or encourage off duty socializing or alcohol consumption among its in?ight crew or employees generally. In?ight crew often work long hours and their positions are demanding. WestJet expects and reminds crew members to obtain suf?cient rest during Layovers in order to be fully ?t to perform their work during the following shift. WestJet speci?cally discourages excessive alcohol consumption during Layovers, including through regulation of alcohol consumption in advance of scheduled ?ights. 26. WestJet denies the allegation that ?ight attendants are vulnerable to pilots. The Pilot in Command is responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft and for the safety of all persons and cargo on board. While on duty, all ?ight attendants report to the Pilot in 07/2010 2 . . - 4 27. 28. 29. Command. WestJet pilots are responsible for demonstrating leadership and for providing operational instructions to ?ight attendants during ?ights. Contrary to the allegation at paragraph 16 of Part1 of the Notice of Civil Claim, ?ight attendants are not required or expected to follow any direction or instruction from pilots while they are on Layover. Flight attendants on Layover are off duty. In fact, as required by industry regulation, Layovers are rest periods free from all duty and uninterrupted by WestJet. WestJet denies that pilots manage ?ight attendants. Flight attendants do report to pilots while they are in ?ight. However, when not ?ying, ?ight attendants report to their Performance Support Manager and the Flight Attendant Manager. In particular, pilots have no responsibility for employment decisions relating to ?ight attendants, including decisions regarding scheduling, compensation, promotion, discipline, or termination. WestJet strictly denies the bald and general allegation at paragraph 21 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim that pilots engage in sexual harassment and commit sexual assault and puts Lewis to the strict proof thereof. WestJetter Training 30. WestJet provides proper and comprehensive anti-harassment and discrimination training to all employees including pilots and ?ight attendants. Flight attendants and pilots participate in Crew Resource Management training at the time they are hired and at regular intervals during their employment. This training speci?cally covers professional conduct, including harassment, and addresses both on and off-duty situations. In addition, as part of pilot upgrade training, WestJet provides training that addresses speci?c situations pilots may face on and off duty including appropriate off duty conduct on Layovers. Lewis? Employment Employment Contract 31. 32. Lewis commenced employment with WestJet in March 2008. The provisions of the Code form part of the terms and conditions of Lewis? employment. However, in speci?c answer to paragraph 14 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim, WestJet states that the Code does not include the speci?c terms as pleaded. History of Performance Concerns 33. 34. Lewis? employment, which commenced in March 2008, was marred by signi?cant performance de?ciencies beginning in her ?rst year of employment. She was consistently performance managed for poor attendance, failure to adhere to WestJet policies, and other performance de?ciencies. In particular, Lewis was issued formal discipline on the following eight separate occasions: 07/2010 3 . i a. On October 14, 2008, Lewis was issued a written warning for poor attendance, including a failure to report to one shift, and failure to follow standard operating procedures; b. On February 4, 2009, Lewis was issued a suspension for failure to report to work as scheduled and failure to follow attendance procedures; c. On September 23, 2009, Lewis was issued a ?nal warning for continued failure to comply with proper attendance procedures. Lewis was advised that she was not complying with WestJet?s expectations, that her performance would be monitored, and that continued failure to meet expectations could result in the termination of her employment; d. On April 16, 2010, as a result of a failed ?ight audit, Lewis was issued a written warning due to concerns with her technical performance, including failing to give a boarding announcement, inadequately stowing service carts, and violating uniform standards; e. On August 31, 2011, Lewis was issued a verbal warning for poor attendance and failure to follow attendance procedures; f. On September 20, 2013, Lewis was issued a written warning for failure to comply with WestJet?s policy regarding minimum hours of work; g. On December 15, 2013, Lewis was issued a letter of expectation after the captain on one of her shifts expressed concerns that members of the ?ight crew, including Lewis, violated regulations by consuming alcohol prior to shift, a serious safety violation; the captain removed Lewis and two others from the shift in question due to safety concerns which resulted in the cancellation of the ?ight; and h. On May 28, 2014, Lewis was issued a written warning for failing to report for a scheduled shift, which resulted in the delay of a ?ight, as well as sharing log-on and password information in violation of WestJet?s Acceptable Use Policy. 35. From the beginning of her employment, Lewis had consistently poor attendance, both in reporting late to scheduled shifts and failing to report for scheduled shifts. This is a critical performance de?ciency in WestJet?s business. When members of WestJet?s in?ight crew are late or do not report to work, WestJet faces a risk of delayed or cancelled ?ights, which in turn directly impacts guest satisfaction. History of Inappropriate Communication 36. During her employment Lewis engaged in aggressive and inappropriate public communications that referenced WestJet. 37. WestJet distributes operations related communications through employee email. For safety reasons, ?ight attendants are required to read and sign off on those communications before their scheduled pairings. In November 2014, WestJet discovered that Lewis had a signi?cant 07/2010 9' . I 6 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. number of unread communications. Lewis? manager advised Lewis that she wanted to book a meeting to discuss the unread communications. Immediately thereafter, Lewis posted the following on her Facebook page, which identi?ed Lewis as a WestJet ?ight attendant: Well slap me sideways and call me The Gimp, guess who just got a phone call for a ?disciplinary action? meeting vis a vis not reading EMAILS (that do not directly pertain to my eligibility as being a fully functioning and legal on line ?ight attendant - which I most certainly am)? Emails I have consistently not read for the last SEVEN And I?m being targeted ONE day after the agreement unfolds it?s pretty little truths. Hm. Whoopsies - you picked the wrong lamb to be your example. Mandy?s smiling. Gird your loins. Following this post, Lewis? managers again attempted to schedule a meeting with her to discuss both her unread communications and acceptable social media use. Lewis signi?cantly delayed the meeting and attempted to obstruct WestJet?s standard performance management process. On March 3, 2015, Lewis advised her In?ight Performance and Support Manager YVR (the that she wanted to record all work related telephone calls. Lewis maintains a blog which clearly identi?ed her as a WestJet ?ight attendant. In March 2015, WestJet discovered a post on the homepage of Lewis? blog entitled ?who the fuck are you?? in which she referred to WestJet guests as assholes: My day jobs include serving cancer in a can to assholes at 40,000 ft and making assholes bendy in a hot chamber at 103 degrees. I was told I could do anything I put my mind to! So I became a ?ight attendant. The Joker, the smoker, the midnight toker. .. WestJet states that the above noted incidents related directly to Lewis? employment with WestJet, impacted WestJet?s legitimate business interests, and led to a deterioration of the employment relationship. These incidents were aggravated by the fact that they occurred during a time period in which WestJet?s senior management had repeatedly emphasized to all employees the importance of respectful communications, including as follows: 0 On December 3, 2014, WestJet issued a company-wide communication via Gregg Saretsky?s blog reminding all employees to maintain a level of respect and professionalism in all communications; 0 On the same day, Tyson Matheson, Vice President, In?ight, sent a letter to each individual ?ight attendant reminding them of their obligations under the Code to treat one another with respect; and O7/20l0 r' . 0 On November 16, 2015, Mark Porter (?Porter?), Executive Vice President, People and Culture, issued a communication to all WestJetters calling for respectful discussion. Porter speci?cally stated that posts on social media regarding WestJet?s business are never appropriate. Gross Insubordination 44. On September 25, 2015, Lewis made a request for a copy of her employment ?le to her PSMtime did Lewis advise her PSM or WestJet generally that the request for her employment ?le was related to the Lewis Complaint or WestJet?s investigation into the Lewis Complaint. WestJet denies that Lewis? demands were met with delay. Rather, the PSM responded immediately requesting clari?cation regarding the type of information Lewis was seeking. The PSM advised that certain parts of the employment ?le would take more time to produce due to the format in which they were stored. Lewis responded that she was requesting her entire ?le and that she understood it would take some work to produce it. At no time did Lewis suggest that there was any urgency associated with her request. The PSM advised Lewis that the ?le would be provided to her. She further advised Lewis that she was away on vacation until October 6, 2015 and that her goal would be to provide the ?le within 30 days of her return. Ultimately, it took WestJet longer than anticipated to provide Lewis? employment ?le. WestJet states that it continuously kept Lewis up to date regarding the status of her request. At no time did WestJet intentionally delay or fail to properly prioritize Lewis? request. On January 12, 2016, Lewis wrote to her PSM and the Senior Manager, People Relations demanding as follows: Where the fuck is my usb card with my ?le on it. It has been 90 days since I requested them. Fed ex it asap. (the ?Inappropriate Communication?) Ultimately, WestJet was able to provide Lewis? employment ?le to her in January, 2016. Lewis? Inappropriate Communication was completely unprovoked and did not arise in the midst of a heated discussion of any kind. The manner in which Lewis deliberately chose to communicate in writing demonstrated contempt and a complete lack of respect for her PSM and the Senior Manager, People. Her decision to include a member of the senior management team re?ected her lack of respect for the West] et leadership generally. As such, the Inappropriate Communication re?ected a complete and ?nal breakdown of the already signi?cantly damaged employment relationship. 07l2010 .v . 3 Termination for Just Cause 50. The nature of the employment relationship between Lewis and WestJet had been deteriorating as a result of WestJet?s attempts to performance manage Lewis. Lewis was inappropriately resistant to such performance management initiatives. 51. Lewis? employment was terminated for just cause on January 12, 2016. WestJet states that Lewis? grossly insubordinate and insolent email, combined with Lewis? extensive disciplinary record, warranted the termination of Lewis? employment for just cause. WestJet states that the employment relationship was fundamentally and irreparable damaged by Lewis? conduct. Sexual Assault Allegations Investigations Investigations 52. WestJet is committed to taking all reasonable steps to provide a safe workplace free from discrimination, harassment and assault. WestJet takes allegations of discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault extremely seriously. WestJet has comprehensive policies and procedures in place to ensure it ful?lls its obligation to conduct a proper and complete investigation into all such allegations. 53. WestJet strives for fairness in its investigation process. A fair investigation includes a balanced consideration of the accounts provided by all individuals involved. A fair investigation draws conclusions that are grounded in the available evidence and that are measured and just to all of the participants in the investigation. 54. WestJet investigations are con?dential. Con?dentiality is a standard operating procedure utilized in harassment and other workplace investigations. It is required to ensure the integrity of the investigation and the privacy of the individuals involved. It is WestJet?s standard practice to advise all employees involved in an investigation of the requirement for con?dentiality. 2008 Investigation 55. WestJet strictly denies the allegations set out at paragraphs 22 24 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim, and puts Lewis to the strict proof thereof. Lewis was not involved in, and has no direct knowledge of, the allegations raised in those paragraphs. Lewis Complaint 56. WestJet strictly denies the allegations set out at paragraphs 25-36 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim, and puts Lewis to the strict proof thereof. 57. On or about January 26, 2010, Lewis reported to WestJet that she had been assaulted by Pilot on a Layover in Maui (the ?Lewis Complaint?). 07/2010 9 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. WestJet immediately assisted Lewis upon her return home from Maui by removing her from the rest of her scheduled shift, offering her support, and encouraging her to report the allegations to the Maui police. Lewis subsequently completed a Police Report and provided WestJet with a copy. WestJet immediately launched a full and complete investigation into Lewis? allegations against Pilot WestJet advised all participants, including Lewis, that the investigation into her complaint was con?dential. WestJet speci?cally denies refusing to provide Lewis with information regarding the investigation and further speci?cally denies asking Lewis to sign an agreement not to disclose information regarding the alleged assault. At the conclusion of the investigation, based on the available evidence, WestJet was unable to conclude that Pilot had assaulted Lewis. WestJet expects that its employees will conduct themselves professionally at all times, including when off duty on Layovers. Excessive drinking, partying, and fraternization with ?ight attendants either individually or in groups fails to adhere to these principles. WestJet concluded that PilotM failed to meet the standards of conduct and judgment expected of a pilot. He was advised at the conclusion of the investigation that he was not meeting the expectations of the role of Captain speci?cally related to judgment and compliance with the Respect in the Workplace Policy. WestJet issued a suSpension and Last Chance Agreement to Pilot M. WestJet told Pilot that it was aware that a police report had been ?led in relation to the events. He was further advised in writing that the WestJet investigation was not closed and that further corrective action up to and including termination for just cause could be imposed if further information came to light following a police investigation and/or criminal trial. As part of the Last Chance Agreement imposed upon Pilot M, he was advised that any further infractions or failure to meet WestJet?s expectations could result in his dismissal with cause. WestJet did not terminate Pilot M?s employment because its ?ndings and conclusions in the investigation did not warrant such action. Lewis was not speci?cally advised of the disciplinary actions imposed because such a disclosure would have violated the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, SC 2000, 5. The ETOPS Program 68. 69. 07/2010 In addition to the discipline noted above, WestJet also removed Pilot from participation in the ETOPS program. The ETOPS program affords pilots the opportunity to ?y on international ?ight routes, including Hawaii. In order to qualify for entry into the program, pilots must apply, meet 10 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. certain mandatory regulatory requirements, and have their ?ight performance vetted by the ?ight operations department. Participation in the program is considered a signi?cant privilege. Many more pilots apply for the ETOPS program than are admitted. Pilots are admitted to the program for a speci?c cycle. They cannot participate inde?nitely because of the large number of pilots who want to participate in the program. Consequently, pilots cycle in and out of the program. It takes approximately two years for a pilot to be re-enrolled in the program at the conclusion of a cycle. Removal from the program is a common form of discipline for pilots who have not met Westlet?s expectations. It would have been contrary to WestJet practice f0r a pilot to remain in the ETOPS program after having been given a suspension and Last Chance Agreement. Pilot was removed from the then current cycle of ETOPS. He was not permanently disquali?ed from the ETOPS program. PilotM subsequently re?applied for the ETOPS program and was re-admitted. He has since returned to ?ying international routes, including to Maui. Westlet speci?cally denies that it took steps to protect Pilot as alleged in paragraph 40 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim or at all. Westlet had communications with the Maui District Attorney in 2010. At no time was WestJet requested to do anything to assist in the Maui investigation. The Maui District Attorney did not express any concerns with any action taken by WestJet in the handling of the matter. Actions Subsequent to Lewis Investigation 75. 76. 77. 07/2010 At the speci?c request of Lewis, WestJet agreed to avoid scheduling Lewis and Plaintiff to work together. In the result, Lewis was not required to work reserve shifts (referred to as ?Holding Reserve?). An exemption from Holding Reserve is a signi?cant privilege that is generally afforded to ?ight attendants with the most seniority. From 2010 to the end of her employment with WestJet, Lewis continued to insist that she not be required to Hold Reserve and WestJet continued to grant this privilege. On at least one occasion when Lewis was inadvertently scheduled to Hold Reserve, Lewis wrote to WestJet immediately to object to the shift. WestJet speci?cally denies that the failure to Hold Reserve or any changes Lewis requested to her schedule resulted in any loss of hours or compensation to her. Westlet made every effort to ?ll Lewis schedule. In any event, Lewis was paid for full hours even if she did not work. Equally, Pilot M?s removal from the ETOPS program was a bene?t to Lewis given that she had requested not to be assigned to work with Pilot M. Because Pilot was removed from ETOPS, Lewis was able to maintain the privilege of ?ying on international routes, including to Maui, without any risk of her schedule con?icting with Pilot M. -ll 78. 79. 1. [n speci?c answer to paragraph 9 of Part 1 of the Notice of Civil Claim, WestJet denies that Lewis brought any new information related to the 2008 investigation or the Lewis Complaint to WestJet?s attention in 2015 or at any time. During her employment with WestJet, Lewis repeatedly demonstrated that she was capable of asserting her rights on many issues in the workplace. However, at no time did Lewis ever engage WestJet?s Guaranteed Fair Treatment Policy and Process (or Dispute Resolution Policy) to object to or challenge the results of WestJet?s investigation speci?cally or WestJet?s handling of the Lewis Complaint in general. In fact, Lewis did not express her dissatisfaction with the outcome of her complaint until after the termination of her employment for cause, some 6 years after the actions complained of. Division 3 - Additional Facts None. Part 2: RESPONSE TO RELIEF SOUGHT 1. WestJet opposes the granting of all of the relief sought in Part 2 of the Notice of Civil Claim. Part 3: LEGAL BASIS No Wrongful Dismissal 1. WestJet denies that it wrongfully dismissed Lewis from her employment. Rather, Lewis? employment was terminated for just cause as described herein. No Negligence 2. 3. 07/2010 WestJet denies that it is liable to Lewis for negligence as alleged or at all. WestJet states that, within the employment relationship, no independent tort of negligence or tort of negligent investigation exists at law. The events raised in the Lewis Complaint occurred while Lewis and Pilot were off duty and acting outside the scope of their employment. WestJet denies that it failed to ful?l any duty of care it may have owed to Lewis during the Layover in question and in the course of its investigation into the Lewis Complaint. WestJet states that it took all reasonable steps to provide a safe work environment to Lewis including: a. Promulgating appropriate policies prohibiting harassment and discrimination in the workplace; b. Providing appropriate training to employees regarding harassment and discrimination; 12 c. Properly investigating the 2008 Incident and the Lewis Complaint; and (1. Acting appropriately and in accordance with the results of those investigations. 7. WestJet strictly denies it imposed any changes to Pilot M?s employment with the intent to protect him from a criminal investigation in Maui. Rather, WestJet issued a common form of discipline to pilots involving temporarily removing Pilot from ?ying international routes. Pilot returned to ?ying international routes, including ?ying to Maui. 8. WestJet denies that it demanded that Lewis remain silent about the allegations of sexual assault. Rather, in accordance with its standard and appropriate procedures, WestJet advised Lewis that its investigation into the allegations was con?dential. Further, WestJet encouraged Lewis to report the allegations to the Police. In any event, the fact is that Lewis spoke openly and extensively about her allegations to other WestJetters. 9. WestJet pleads and relies on the Limitation Act, S.B.C. 2012, c. 13 in respect of any negligence claim arising out of the Lewis Complaint and/or WestJet?s response to the Lewis Complaint. WestJet states that the particulars of those allegations and WestJet?s response to those allegations were fully known to Lewis in 2010. No Breach of Contract 10. WestJet denies that it is liable to Lewis for breach of contract. 11. WestJet repeats and relies on its pleadings in paragraphs 4-8 above. 12. WestJet strictly denies that it breached its employment contract with Lewis. 13. In the alternative, in the event that WestJet breached its employment contract with Lewis, as alleged or at all, Lewis condoned any such breach by failing to object to the alleged breach at the time it occurred and by continuing her employment with WestJet over many years following the alleged breach. 14. WestJet pleads and relies on the Limitation Act, S.B.C. 2012, c. 13 in respect of any claim for breach of contract arising out of the Lewis Complaint and/or WestJet?s response to the Lewis Complaint. WestJet states that the particulars of those allegations and WestJet?s response to those allegations were fully known to Lewis in 2010. No Damages 15. WestJet denies that Lewis has suffered any damage or loss, as alleged, or at all. In the alternative, WestJet denies that Lewis has suffered any damage or loss as a result of any action or inaction of WestJet. No Wrongful Dismissal Damages 16. WestJet denies that Lewis is entitled to any damages arising out of the termination of her employment and states that Lewis? employment was terminated for just cause. 07/2010 . - 13 17. Lewis has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to mitigate her alleged damages arising out of the termination of her employment and she has failed in this obligation. In the alternative, Lewis has fully mitigated her damages and WestJet requests an accounting of and credit for all of Lewis? income in the period since the termination of her employment. 18. WestJet denies that Lewis suffered harm as alleged or at all (the ?Alleged Harm?). In the alternative, WestJet denies that the Alleged Harm was caused by any action or inaction of WestJet. In the further alternative, WestJet denies that the Alleged Harm was a reasonably foreseeable result of WestJet?s action or inaction. l9. WestJet states that it acted in good faith in all of its dealings with Lewis. WestJet strictly denies that the termination of Lewis employment was high handed and/or retaliatory. 20. WestJet denies that Lewis is entitled to punitive damages. 21. WestJet asks that Lewis? claim be dismissed with costs to WestJet. Defendant?s address for service: McLennan Ross LLP 1000 First Canadian Centre 350 7?h Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2P 3N9 Tel 403.543.9152 Fax 403.303.1670 imitchell@mross.com acne a? Date oyce'MEchell, McLennan Ross LLP, lawyer for the Defendant Rule (1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules States: (1) Unless all parties of record consent or the court otherwise orders, each party of record to an action must, within 35 days after the end of the pleading period, prepare a list of documents in Form 22 that lists all documents that are or have been in the party?s possession or control and that could, if available, be used by any party at trial to prove or disprove a material fact, and (ii) all other documents to which the party intends to refer at trial, and serve the list on all parties of record. 07/2010 14