Time for Cyclesmith to shift gears

Former employees blow the whistle on workplace sexism and non-compliance

By Lisa Cameron on behalf of the Halifax Workers’ Action Centre

Recently, Cyclesmith’s tires have been pumped. Celebrated for its living wage policy, the Halifax-based bicycle shop has garnered positive media attention and was named Business of the Year by the Halifax Chamber of Commerce.

But Cyclesmith’s pro-worker image contradicts the experience of three former employees. Hannah Estabrook and Arena Thomson Alamino – both fired – and Antonia Chircop – who says poor treatment forced her to quit – recall unpaid wages and a sexist workplace culture, substantiated and exacerbated by a highly imbalanced gender ratio. During their respective employments, female staff hovered between just two and five among over 30 male workers.

Hoping that Cyclesmith will change its ways, they are speaking out.

Unpaid training

The Halifax Workers’ Action Centre, a legal information resource for non-unionized workers, received a phone call on October 19, 2022, from a then-Cyclesmith employee, Hannah Estabrook.

“Cyclesmith required employees to complete approximately 30 hours of unpaid training from home in exchange for a $100 bonus,” said Estabrook. “This was outlined in the company policy and reiterated by management. We had six weeks from our start date to complete it. I wanted to know if this was legal.”

All hours of work must be paid

Under Nova Scotia employment law, this is illegal. All hours of work must be compensated, including training. A $100 bonus does not account for the training, even at minimum wage.

Estabrook expressed her concerns to her employer by email. “Given that it’s illegal not to pay employees for training, I suggested that it be paid or be made optional,” said Estabrook. “They replied asking to meet me in person.” 

On October 26, 2022, Estabrook met with the store owner and one of the managers. 

“The meeting felt confrontational,” said Estabrook. “Despite it being outlined in their policy and repeated to me verbally and by email, they denied that the training was mandatory. I felt like I was being gaslit.”

Management told Estabrook that she could forgo the training – but at a cost. 

“They said that they would revoke all of my employee benefits if I didn’t do the training on their terms. This included my employee discount, group RRSP plan, and more.”

Going downhill

Following the meeting, Estabrook said Cyclesmith’s treatment of her worsened. 

“I felt increasingly targeted and criticized for trivial things, despite having high sales and a positive relationship with my co-workers and customers,” said Estabrook.

For example, Estabrook was reprimanded for missing a capital letter on a customer’s postal address. “The address was provided by the customer and written in Dutch. I was called into the office and scolded for not understanding proper nouns. It was ridiculous.”

On November 30, 2022, the day her probation ended, Estabrook was fired.

“I was shocked. I was a solid employee,” she said. “They had never raised any issues with my performance. The only thing that seemed to upset them was that I had challenged the illegal training policy.”

Estabrook pressed for an explanation. “I was told I ‘wasn’t a good fit’ and that no further reasoning or examples would be provided.” 

While her stance on unpaid training was not mentioned, Estabrook found the timing suspicious. 

“Immediately after I was fired, Cyclesmith notified employees of a change to their policy,” she said. “It now stated that the training was not mandatory, but that employee benefits were contingent on it.” 

Freedom from reprisal

The Nova Scotia Labour Standards Code prohibits employers from retaliating against employees for exercising their rights under the Code. Firing a worker for refusing unpaid work is illegal. Likewise, when a company policy states that benefits are contingent on unpaid training, workers who refuse are essentially being punished.

Gender profiling customers

According to Estabrook, Chircop, and Thomson Alamino, Cyclesmith has a pattern of retaliating against female employees who stand up for themselves.  

Antonia Chircop was hired on January 8, 2021. After experiencing what she describes as misogynistic behaviour by management, she quit five months before Estabrook started.

“They put forward a progressive image,” said Chircop, an experienced cyclist who assumed the company would be welcoming. “But it was soon clear that management had an issue with women.”

Approximately one year into her employment, Chircop raised concerns about a practice she found problematic. “When we created a customer profile in the database, we had to select their gender. The options were ‘male,’ ‘female,’ and ‘other,'” she said. “It made me and some co-workers uncomfortable.”

Management dismissed her concerns. “They told us to select the customer’s gender based on how they presented and that the customer would never know,” said Chircop, who had been misgendered as a Cyclesmith customer herself. “They explained that this was to gather sales data and that, at the end of the day, they were a business.” 

Backpedaling

After voicing her opinion, Chircop’s relationship with management declined. “I was called out repeatedly for being disruptive when I wasn’t,” said Chircop. “I acted in the same manner as my male co-workers, but I wasn’t treated the same. Once, I was reprimanded for saying good morning to a co-worker before my shift even started.”

At one point, Chircop told management that she felt targeted. “One manager said that, if I thought there was a target on my back, it was because there was and that they were watching me more closely than everyone else.”

Chircop had been training for a new position as a Cyclesmith bike builder. “Only men held these positions,” said Chircop. “I am passionate about bikes and was keen to learn more. I felt like I earned it.”

On February 25, 2022, management called Chircop into the office. 

“I was accused, again, of being a distraction,” she said. “They also said I was only being trained as a bike builder because I was disruptive, and they needed a suitable way to handle me – not because I was skilled. I was distraught.” 

In that meeting, Chircop’s comments about the database were raised. 

“When asked, I reiterated my position that we should not be assuming the genders of our customers,” said Chircop. “They said my job at Cyclesmith wasn’t an opportunity to ‘change the world.’ Essentially, I was mocked and told to get over it.”

Chircop handed in her notice four days later. “I couldn’t work in an environment where women’s perspectives were disregarded like that. My values didn’t align with the company. I was being targeted. I had enough.” 

“Not a good fit”

Arena Thomson Alamino worked at Cyclesmith from December 1, 2021, to January 12, 2022. Management, she felt, was unnecessarily pedantic towards women.

“I was called into the office multiple times over things that seemed trivial,” she said. I was riddled with anxiety over the frequent ‘check-ins.’ My co-workers and customers thought I was doing well, but management’s feedback was always negative and lacked support and guidance.”

Thomson Alamino said her male co-workers enjoyed relative freedom. “I was one of three female employees among over 30 men,” she said. “I never saw a male employee singled out, let alone fired. Unlike my female co-workers and me, they seemed to do as they pleased. Women had to work twice as hard and never received the same respect.”

One month into her employment, Thomson Alamino was fired. “They gave the same reason women seem to get,” said Thomson Alamino. “I was told I just ‘wasn’t a good fit.’”

Support from an anonymous co-worker

On February 17, 2023, the Halifax Workers’ Action Centre spoke with a current Cyclesmith employee and former co-worker of Estabrook, Thomson Alamino, and Chircop. 

Speaking anonymously, the employee said, “They were good workers. None of them deserved to be fired. I’ve noticed female employees being burdened with extra tasks and chores. It seems like women are treated differently.”

According to the employee, the training policy has not been updated since Estabrook was terminated, and Cyclesmith still requires staff to input customers’ gender into the database without their consent.

Good for business

Estabrook, Chircop, and Thomson Alamino believe that Cyclesmith’s positive image is at odds with its values.

“They have a knack for optics,” said Thomson Alamino. “I believe they’ve created the illusion of a safe, progressive workplace because it’s good for business.”

Estabrook finds the positive media attention upsetting. “It’s infuriating to see this company glorified,” said Estabrook. “Our experiences completely contradict the praise they’re getting,” she said. “Paying a living wage doesn’t give Cyclesmith the right to treat their workers horribly.” 

Shifting gears

When asked their desired outcome, the three former Cyclesmith employees said they wanted to protect customers and future workers from being fooled. “We don’t want compensation,” said Estabrook. “We want people to know the truth.”

They would also like to see management to undergo serious gender sensitivity training as well as consider hiring women in more positions of authority. “There is no shortage of women in the cycling world,” said Chircop. “There should be women at all levels of the company, and they should be respected and treated fairly.”