A former employee of a now-defunct modular home builder in Penticton and Agassiz had his second attempt at a class action lawsuit tossed on April 15.

Byron Linza was attempting to get certification for a lawsuit representing about 100 employees of Triple M Modular, doing business as Metric Modular, (Modular) against the business's parent company, Triple M Housing (Housing).

The claim alleged the employees all had their jobs terminated between May and September 2020, without cause, notice, or payment in lieu of notice.

Housing bought Modular from Britco in 2017, and just a few months after Modular celebrated its 100th home built in Penticton in April 2019, the Penticton facility was shuttered.

Any remaining contracted homes were then finished off at the Agassiz facility before that was shuttered and Modular declared bankruptcy in 2020.

As a result of the bankruptcy, Linza and the employees were unable to sue the company for wrongful dismissal.

Instead, Linza sought to sue Housing, since that company was not bankrupt, by claiming Housing was a common employer alongside Modular. 

In 2023, Justice Norell declined to grant certification over various issues but allowed Linza to amend his claims and case. 

The April 15 ruling by Justice Norell found that although Linza had made changes to his application, the plan he presented for litigation failed to address the complexities of the case and the expectation that the case would likely break down into individual trials with limited common issues. 

"The plan is fairly described as a statement that Mr. Linza will follow the Supreme Court Civil Rules as to the timelines, take the usual steps for discovery and preparation of the case, attempt to settle or have the common issues trial heard, and keep in contact with proposed class members," wrote Justice Norell. "The plan does not meaningfully grapple with how the individual issues will be addressed. More than this is required in a case such as this where there are significant individual issues."

The justice noted that it would be unlikely for a class action suit to be faster or less expensive than lawsuits filed by individual employees. Seven individual claims have already been filed. 

"In my view, the administration of the class proceeding would likely create greater difficulties than those that would be experienced if relief were sought by individual actions," said Norell. "This is because I find it will largely become approximately 100 individual trials, possibly managed by one judge, limiting the resources to the parties."

The April 15 decision dismissed the application for class action certification and this time gave no leave for amendments.