Duty to Accommodate – Perfection Not Required
By: Michelle QuinnIn Gaucher v. Fraser Health Authority and others, 2019 BCHRT 243, Carrie Gaucher (“Ms. Gaucher”) worked as a nurse for the Fraser Health Authority (“Fraser Health”) since 2007 at the Royal Columbian Hospital. In June 2017, Ms. Gaucher sustained a workplace injury and was off work for a few months.
In November 2017, she commenced a gradual return to work plan (“GRTW”). In total, Ms. Gaucher participated in three separate attempts to gradually return to work. Ultimately, she completed her return in April 2018.
Ms. Gaucher filed a human rights complaint (the “Complaint”) with the BC Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) against Fraser Health and several management employees alleging that they harassed her and negatively treated her throughout her GRTW. She alleged that she was discriminated against on the basis of her disability contrary to the BC Human Rights Code (the “Code”).
She did not allege that the substantive terms of her GRTW were discriminatory. Rather, she believed that, throughout the process, her managers failed to treat her fairly and with due respect to her dignity.
Fraser Health applied to have the Complaint dismissed on the grounds that there was no reasonable prospect of success under the Code.
The Decision
The Tribunal determined that, based on all the evidence before it, there was no reasonable prospect that the Complaint will succeed at a hearing.
With specific regard to the GRTW plan and, while the conditions in the workplace were “not optimal” for Ms. Gaucher’s successful return, it did not amount to a failure to accommodate. Her experience of the GRTW was difficult, and it was not perfect. However, the standard for accommodation is not perfection. It is reasonableness (para. 87).
The Tribunal held (at para. 95):
If you have any questions about this case or the duty to accommodate generally, please contact any member of the Employment and Human Rights Group.
-
Privacy issues have suddenly been appearing in the news, as we all grapple with COVID-19. What information can be disclosed about someone who is sick? What technology can we use to contain the spread? Can videoconference programs be used to help people work remotely? This blog post tries to give short answers to each of these questions, from a privacy law perspective.
-
The Court of Appeal provided guidance recently on how CERB payments should be treated with respect to wrongful dismissal damages. In Yates v. Langley Motor Sport Centre Ltd., 2022 BCCA 398 the Court of Appeal found that CERB payments do not concern employers in wrongful dismissal claims, as it is a benefit provided to workers to offset the impact of the COVID-19 from the authorities administering the income assistance program, not the employers. Therefore, taking into account policy considerations, the Court of Appeal deemed it would not be keep with the intention of Parliament to deduct CERB payments from wrongful dismissal damages.
