BCE, a major Canadian corporation that owns Bell, has terminated several employees for breaching workplace attendance and remote work policies. However, allegations have surfaced suggesting that the terminations were unjust and aimed at avoiding severance payments, as reported by CBC News.
An email from Bell’s chief human resources officer, Nikki Moffat, claimed that the terminated employees were misrepresenting their presence at work. Disputing this, the fired workers have taken to social media and discussions with CBC News to challenge the company’s assertion.
Bell also accused some terminated employees of “swiping in and leaving shortly after” without fulfilling their work obligations, according to Moffat’s email. However, individuals contacted by CBC News, including employment lawyer Jean-Alexandre De Bousquet representing over 30 terminated Bell workers, contradicted these claims.
De Bousquet stated that most of the terminated employees had never physically worked in the office, even predating the pandemic. He mentioned being in contact with more than 30 terminated employees and speculated that the number could be significant, possibly in the hundreds.
While Bell refuted the assertion of terminating hundreds of employees, maintaining that only a “small number” were fired, they did not disclose specific figures or names of those affected. The company insisted that corporate office employees were required to be physically present at the office for at least two days a week since 2022 and three days a week since 2023, a claim disputed by De Bousquet and his clients.
De Bousquet highlighted that many of his clients were terminated without prior warnings or suspensions. He alleged that Bell fired them under the guise of misconduct to avoid paying severance, a move he deemed as a cost-saving measure for the company.
In response, Bell maintained that the terminations were based on “clear violations” of the company’s code of conduct. Bell spokesperson Luc Levasseur stated that each case underwent a thorough investigation, and the individuals were provided with evidence of their misconduct. Managers condoning the alleged improper activities were also reportedly dismissed.
The terminations occurred following Bell’s previous job cuts in late 2025, where 650 management positions and 40 news division jobs were eliminated to reduce debt and enhance growth prospects. Despite a four percent increase in operating revenue in the early months of this year, Bell’s profits saw a decline due to fluctuating performance across different service segments.
The tightening of attendance policies aligns with the trend of white-collar workers returning to office settings post-pandemic, reflecting similar shifts in other sectors and regions across Canada.
Just cause is a high bar: lawyer
According to Toronto employment lawyer Sundeep Gokhale, employers generally possess the authority to determine employees’ work locations unless explicitly stated otherwise in employment contracts or for specific accommodations.
Gokhale emphasized that before terminating employees, usual practice involves warnings, disciplinary actions, and opportunities for improvement. Dismissing employees for just cause, which entails immediate termination without severance, necessitates meeting a high legal standard.
Key serious offenses like theft, fraud, or record falsification are typically required to justify immediate termination without severance, often viewed as the “capital punishment” of employment law.
Gokhale noted that the outcome of the Bell case will hinge on the individual evidence presented in each employee’s situation.