In a judicial review regarding unjust dismissal under the Canada Labour Code (R.S.C 1985, c. L-2 as of October 9, 2019), the appellant challenged the adjudicator's decision that sided with the employer, Bell Solutions Techniques Inc. (BST). The Federal Court upheld the adjudicator's ruling (2021 FC 177) stating the appellant's termination was due to genuine workforce reduction reasons (lack of work or discontinuation of a function, as per paragraph 242(3.1)(a) of the Code) and not arbitrary. In 2018, BST was directed by its parent company, BCE Inc., to cut jobs for economic reasons. The appellant, a supervisor in the Laval Region, was among those let go. The decision was based on his leadership score, the lowest among Laval supervisors. Management had chosen leadership as the primary criterion due to an anticipated increase in technicians each supervisor would handle post-restructuring (from 26 to 28). The adjudicator confirmed BST's genuine workforce reduction, found the leadership criterion rationale sound, and rejected the appellant’s suggestion that other "acting supervisors" should have been let go instead. Two subsequent vacancies in another district and potential personal differences between the appellant and his manager were deemed irrelevant to the case. The adjudicator concluded BST didn't disguise the appellant’s termination as restructuring, hence the exception in subsection 242(3.1) applied, dismissing the unjust dismissal claim.