Statement Of Defence Says Sexual Harassment Probe Not The Reason For Edge Firing

Retaliation for investigating, or to stop or to hinder a probe by the then general manager of the Downtown Facility and Field House (DFFH) Graham Edge into allegations of sexual harassment at Mosaic Place were not the reasons for the former general manager’s dismissal.

The reasons were because of Edge’s inability to fit in with other staff and relationships with third parties according to a Statement Of Defence filed in a lawsuit surrounding the former general manager’s dismissal.

In the August 21, 2020 Statement of Defence filed on behalf of the five defendents - Brian Swanson, Scott McMann, Crystal Froese, Ted Schaeffer and the DFFH itself - the reasons given for Edge’s dismissal had nothing to do with his probe into the alleged sexual harassment at the DFFH.

“The reason for the termination was the Plaintiff’s incompatibility with staff and relationships with third party groups, which rendered him unsuitable for the position,” the four page Statement Of Defence reads.

Edge on April 14, 2020 launched a lawsuit against the five defendants seeking financial compensation and other damages for not only being wrongfully teminated by the Board but other harm to his reputation and stress because of actions taken by the Defendants.

The decision to terminate Edge’s employment came at a May 24, 2018 meeting of the DFFH Board and the decision made by Swanson, McMann and Froese was unanimous. The termination took effect the following day.

“The Plaintiff was terminated from his position effective May 25, 2018, approximately four months after his employment start date and within the six month probationary period,” the Statement Of Defence reads.

Edge was paid his salary until June 15, 2018.

Defendant Schaeffer, who was emplolyed by the City as the Director of Parks and Recreation at the time, did not participate in the resolution according to the Statement Of Defence.

Edge was not present nor participate in the May 24, 2018 board meeting where he was terminated.

Schaeffer had been pitching in to help re-right the DFFH following revelations the facilities - Mosaic Place and Yara Centre - had suffered losses of $3 million over a three year period as well as other problems including non-existant or poor implementation of human resource policies.

After the August 2016 MNP report the former management board was dissolved and an interim board consisting of then Mayor Deb Higgins, Councillor Heather Eby and Councillor Patrick Boyle was appointed by Council. Following the 2016 Civic election the new interim board consisted of Concillors Swanson, McMann and Froese who made regular in-camera reports to Executive Committee about progress at the DFFH.

Edge, in his April 14, 2020 lawsuit, is suing for wrongful dismissal, damages due to his inability to secure other employment, damages to his reputation, stress related injury and legal fees.

He is also suing for severance pay after not receiving proper notice of his termination given his senior position and circumstances surrounding the case.

Edge’s lawsuit claims he has suffered “irrepairable harm” to his reputation and “harsh, vindictive and malicious” treatment after his termination.

“The Plaintiff states that aggravated and punitive damages are warranted in the circumstances due to the Defendants’ conduct being suppressive, harsh, vindictive and malicious,” the Statement Of Claim filed by Edge reads.

Graham Edge, the former GM of the now defunct DFFH, addresses Council while employed at the facilities - MJ Independent file photo

The Statement Of Defence denies none of the defendants took harsh, vindictive and malicious actions against Edge.

“The Defendants deny that any of their actions or omissions were suppressive, harsh, vindictive, or malicious, and they deny that punitive or aggravated damages are recoverable as alleged…” the Statement of Defence reads.

Edge further claimed he had received at least one letter warning him about speaking publicly about the probe into the allegations of sexual harassment and his treatment. He subsequently hired an attorney after litigation had been threatened against him and was suffering mental distress which contributed to his inability to find employment.

Neither the Statement Of Claim filed by Edge nor the Statement Of Defence filed by the five Defendants has been proven in court.

In his court filing, at the Moose Jaw Court Of Queen’s Bench, Edge claims the true reasons for his firing was in retaliation for his investigation into allegations of sexual harassment involving the DFFH’s director of facilities operations at Mosaic Place Myles Fister.

Edge claimed he became aware of the alleged sexual harassment just days after being hired as general manager on January 15, 2018 and immediately commenced an investigation.

During his probe into the sexual harassment allegations Edge interviewed eight female employees and reported his findings back to the board.

In meetings with the DFFH Board Edge claimed he had recommended immediately terminating Fister and going to the Moose Jaw Police about what had allegedly happened at Mosaic Place.

Edge further claimed there was a split decision by the board on terminating Fister and Councillor Swanson wanted to give Fister a second chance. Edge claims Swanson and Fister had a close friendly relationship and it was Swanson who did not want to see Fister terminated.

Fister was terminated after Council looked into Edge’s allegations and the DFFH Board was dissolved.

In repsonse to the claim the Defendants say that the sexual harassment probe had nothing to do with Edge’s firing.

“The Defendants deny that the Plaintiff’s termination was in any way related to or caused by the Plaintiff’s investigation or reporting of Myle’s Fister to the DFFH Board of Director’s, as alleged in the Claim or at all,” the Statement of Defence reads, going on to state “the Defendants deny that the Plaintiff’s termination was retaliatory as alleged in the Claim or at all.”

The Statement Of Defence also denies that they attempted to hinder or stop Edge’s probe into sexual harassment at the DFFH.

“The Defendants deny minimizing, undermining or supressing the Plaintiff’s investigation into Myles Fisher, as alleged at Paragraph 12 (of the Statement) of the Claim or at all.”

Regarding damages alleged by Edge the Statement of Defence reads “The Defendants deny the nature and extent of the damages and loss claimed by the Plaintiff, and put the Plaintiff to strict proof thereof.”

The Statement of Defence asks the Court to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim with costs.