The hearing before this adjudicator results from a complaint of alleged unjust dismissal under the Canada Labour Code filed by William Fennell against Porter Trucking Ltd. The complaint states:

On the morning of October 12, 1990, I was called into Mr. Pawson's office at 11:00 am. Mr. Pawson and myself discussed the reassignment of the Sales Territories. He stated that I would be moved over to the Richmond area and that Cliff Clugstone would move into my area, Surrey. He then asked how I felt about this move. My reply was I felt secure in the Surrey area and had built up a good Customer Relations. I said to Mr. Pawson that I was surprised he was offering me Richmond, but I never once said that I would not take it. He then asked me how long I've been in the Sales Dept. for Porter Trucking. I replied just under 2 years. His next question was what were my goals with Porter Trucking. My reply was eventually getting into Operations Manager of the Terminal. Mr Pawson's reply was very positive to that and said I would make a very good Operations Manager. As that time the meeting was over and he said "I'll put my thinking cap on and come up with a solution." End of morning meeting.

Friday October 12th, 1990 - 4:25 pm

Mr. Pawson called me into his office and said I was terminated effective immediately.

I feel Porter Trucking Ltd. Unjustifiably terminated me and id not pay me my final severance pay. According to Labour Canada, Porter Trucking owes me 16 days pay.

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS

The Employer testified that Porter Trucking Ltd. Is a common carrier transport business, which transports all typed of commodities to all major points in Western Canada. It is a privately-owned business with a head office in Calgary.

INTEREST

The Complainant seeks interest on the award and provided the decision Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Canada Ltd. V Lee-Shansk (Federal Court of Canada, Court of Appeal. Stone J June 29, 1988) to support this claim. It is, in my view, appropriate to award interest in this case and I rely on the authority of an adjudicator under s. 24 2 (4) © of the Canada Labour Code as well as the established juisprudence.

ORDER

Having found that the Complainant has been unjustly dismissed, this adjudicator orders that the Employer compensate the Complainant in the following manner:

a)	Wages at the gross weekly rate of $586.54 for the period October 13, 1990 to and including November 3, 1991, less: (1) Wages received by the Complainant from Dolphin Delivery Ltd. From July 2, 1991 to October 22, 1991 (2) Unemployment insurance received by the Complainant for the period November 21, 1990 to August 19, 1991
b)	Interest at the prime rate from time to time of the Royal Bank of Canada plus one percentage point compounded annually on the gross wages less unemployment insurance and less wages received from Dolphin Delivery Ltd. Payable from time to time to the date of payment.
c)	The Employer is order to pay to the Receiver General of Canada the amount of unemployment insurance paid to the Complainant for the period November 21, 1990 to August 19, 1991 and interest on the amount paid at the prime rate of the Royal bank of Canada from time to time plus one percentage point compounded annually to the date of payment.
d)	The Employer is ordered to withhold at source and to remit to the Receiver General of Canada directly any amount in respect to income tax that is payable on the award of compensation herein.
e)	The Employer is further ordered to pay any party-and-party costs that the Complainant incurred as a result of this complaint. This remedy is within the range of possible remedies in s. 242 (4) © of the Canada Labour Code and is awarded because of the circumstances of the termination.

Dated at Vancouver this 2nd day of December 1991

Donna M. Gillis