Joel Smith discussed attendance management policies and programs in relation to Bezoine v City of Ottawa, a decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that dismissed the discrimination claim of a probationary worker who was dismissed for too many unexplained absences, despite the fact that the worker had medical issues that had led to other, non-culpable absences.
See an excerpt below:
Ontario worker’s termination for culpable absences not discriminatory
Employer distinguished between absences supported by medical documentation and those with none
“A key element of any strong attendance management policy or program is to make sure that employers are distinguishing absences for which there’s a legitimate explanation,” says Joel Smith, a partner at Williams HR Law in the Toronto area.
“For an employer to dismiss somebody for a non-culpable absence, a legitimate absence, or one that would amount to something for which they’re entitled to accommodation under human rights legislation, that would likely be found to be discriminatory.”
“So distinguishing between those two – and doing it in a way that’s clear, accurate, and is consistent with human rights legislation is a crucial thing for any employer to do.”
Smith’s comments follow a decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal looking at the City of Ottawa’s attendance management program.
The tribunal dismissed the discrimination claim of a probationary worker who was fired for too many unexplained absences, despite the fact that the worker had medical issues that had led to other, non-culpable absences.