(October 16 – 15:15 ET) – Primerica Financial Services Ltd. should be allowed to take a dispute with former Primerica trainee Cindy Huras to arbitration, says the Ontario Court of Appeal.
Huras joined Primerica’s sales force in 1996. In order to qualify for membership she was obliged to participate in a three-month training program offered by Primerica, which she successfully completed. Huras launched a class action suit on behalf of former Primerica sales trainees weren’t paid while receiving training.
Huras claimed damages for the defendant’s failure to pay minimum wage for training; damages as a result of the unjust enrichment of the defendant; and punitive damages as a result of the Primerica’s continuing failure to pay minimum wages despite knowledge that its failure to compensate sales representatives was in breach of the Employment Standards Act.
In April, Primerica brought a motion for a court order to stay Huras’ class action suit. The company argued that Huras signed an agreement which stated any dispute between them would be settled by arbitration – not the courts.
The motions court judge dismissed Primerica’s motion. He found that the agreement applied only to the post-training work relationship. The agreement could not be applied retroactively to include the training period, he said.
Primerica filed an appeal. Huras brought a motion to quash the appeal and lost.
The appeal court ruled that the motions court judge “deprived Primerica of a substantive right – the right to resolve its dispute with the plaintiff in good faith negotiation and arbitration.” Primerica can now proceed with its appeal to quash the motion court decision and – again – argue that the dispute should be settled via arbitration.
-IE Staff