When should an employee worry that their off-duty misconduct may give rise to termination for cause?

As recently reported in the press, a single act of misconduct even outside the workplace, can prove fatal

to a career. On an Air India flight from New York to Delhi, a Vice President for Wells Fargo, Shankar

Mishra, was recently reported to have become so intoxicated that he urinated on an elderly female

passenger sitting in a row behind him.

When Mishra sobered up, he realized his predicament and attempted to apologize. It was too late. After

facing criminal charges of harassment and insulting the modesty of a woman under Indian law, he was

fired by the Bank for failing to adhere to exacting professional and personal standards.

Mishra was based in India. What if the incident had occurred in Canada?

The general rule is that the more senior the employee, the more likely their off-duty behaviour will be

viewed as undermining an employer’s legitimate business interests. Negative media coverage will

bolster an employer’s case in justifying their termination for just cause. Conversely, if an employer

cannot demonstrate a nexus to the duties or public profile of the employee - such as a junior staff - then

no cause will be established.