Former Ciena employee sues over retaliation claim
A former employee of Ciena has filed a civil claim in Ottawa’s Superior Court of Justice, alleging she was terminated in retaliation after reporting that a senior executive sexually assaulted her following the company’s annual golf tournament.
Allegations and alleged assault
The plaintiff, identified only as A.B. under a publication ban, says the incident occurred on August 19, 2025. After the tournament, she drove Steven Haley, vice-president of global supply chain, to the Heart & Crown pub. During the 20-minute ride, she alleges Haley exposed himself, touched her in a sexual manner and made explicit comments, despite her repeated requests to stop.
According to the claim, A.B. reported the episode to coworkers immediately after arriving at the pub. She filed an internal complaint the next day and lodged a police report three days later. Ottawa police later charged Haley with sexual assault in December 2025.
According to the claim, the investigator told A.B. that Haley denied the allegations and said he was asleep in the car. His lawyer, David Anber, said in April that Haley disputes the claims and is presumed innocent.
Company investigation and termination
Ciena hired an external firm to investigate the complaint. A.B. claims the investigation was flawed and breached Ciena’s own policies, including its code of business conduct and ethics. She claims the investigator subjected her to victim-blaming questions, such as whether she was flirting with Haley. The investigator concluded the allegations were unfounded, and Ciena accepted that finding.
Read Also: Canadians Seek New Path, Optimistic Beyond U.S. Ties
During the investigation, A.B. says Ciena did not suspend Haley or impose any temporary measures, even though its internal policies allow such action. The claim alleges that Ciena’s chief legal officer met A.B. on the morning of Sept. 24, 2025, and informed her that the investigation had found that no sexual misconduct had taken place and Ciena would not take corrective action against Haley. Court documents also allege that in the same meeting, A.B. was told that she was terminated, effective immediately.
Company representatives maintain that A.B.’s dismissal was part of broader layoffs announced earlier that month. A spokesperson, Nicole Anderson, said the layoffs were decided before the complaint was filed and that the third-party investigation “did not corroborate the claim that was raised with the company.”
Retaliation claims after internal investigations have surfaced in other technology firms, highlighting the difficulty employees face when corporate processes are perceived as inadequate. Such disputes often hinge on whether procedural safeguards were properly applied.
A.B. seeks $220,780.07 in wrongful-dismissal compensation, covering salary, benefits, vacation, RRSP contributions and stock entitlements, plus $100,000 in damages for alleged bad-faith conduct, bringing the total requested amount to more than $320,000.
The claim notes that, unlike other laid-off workers who received two days to clear desks, A.B. lost system access and was barred from the workplace immediately after the termination meeting.
Read Also: Salient Finds Success in Auto Lending
Ciena’s spokesperson, Nicole Anderson, stated that the company’s decision to terminate A.B. was made prior to the complaint being filed, as part of broader company layoffs. The company reported US$4.8 billion in revenue last year and has a significant presence in Ottawa, with 2,000 employees.
The city is home to more than 20 per cent of Ciena’s total workforce, as of September 2025. Ciena expanded its presence in Ottawa in 2010 when it acquired Nortel’s optical networking and ethernet businesses.
Investigation and court proceedings
None of the claims in the criminal or civil case have been tested in court, and Ciena has not yet filed a statement of defence.
A.B.’s lawyer, Julie Mouris, said her client hopes that her action will lead to greater accountability and transparency for companies like Ciena. This includes meaningful enforcement of their own internal policies prohibiting sexual harassment and sexual assault, so that employees can feel confident in reporting such behaviour.
