Canadian Employment Law Today

CREDIT: NITO/SHUTTERSTOCK "regrettable and inappropriate" and he apol- ogized for striking someone. He refused to answer any further questions without being provided them in advance. At a second meeting on Aug. 22, Rahmani stuck by his version of events that he acted defensively and he claimed he was a victim of prejudices from Desbiens and other em - ployees. He presented a medical certificate implying that he had a medical condition that might explain why he acted out, as well as medication that could cause irritability and mood swings. Medical assessment Transport Canada asked Health Canada to assess Rahmani's fitness to work, including whether his medical condition could have been a factor in his violent act and whether he could be reinstated to work. e Health Canada assessment dated Jan. 24, 2013, indicated Rahmani was "unfit for any work at present," and a follow-up letter indicated the condition for which Rahmani was being treated had "the potential to af - fect a person's behaviour and his or her abil- ity to react to stress," with the caveat that it couldn't rule on the medical aspect of the Feb. 10, 2012, incident because Rahmant wasn't evaluated at that time. Transport Canada sought clarification on potential causality between Rahmani's med - ical condition and the Feb. 10 incident and Health Canada once again indicated it didn't evaluate him at the time, but noted that "it is plausible and consistent with the medical information in his file that his medical con - dition was similar in February 2012." On Apr. 4, 2013, Transport Canada ter- minated Rahmani's employment for volun- tarily committing a violent act at work that broke the bond of trust. e department's decision also factored in that Rahmani had never apologized and other employees were afraid to work with him. e board noted that Transport Canada had an obligation to provide a healthy and safe working environment and so it had to uphold the idea that violence in the work - place was unacceptable. is left no doubt that Rahmani's actions warranted a "severe penalty." However, the board considered several mitigating factors. It disagreed that Rahmani showed no remorse, as he admitted the inci - dent was regrettable, though he felt he was being picked on. e board found Desbiens, while not deserving to be assaulted, wasn't an "innocent victim" since there was animosity between him and Rahmani and "it is impos - sible to believe that he did not think of spit- ing" Rahmani by appearing at his door a few minutes after the announcement of his ap- pointment as team supervisor, said the board. e board also found Transport Canada should have been aware of Rahmani's dis- tress — he was unhappy, had bad relations with Desbiens and other employees, he had just come back from sick leave, and Rahmani produced a medical note from his doctor at the first investigation meeting indicating his actions might have been attributable to a medical condition. Rahmani later said he didn't provide the note until months af - ter the incident because he didn't want to share his health problems at work, which the board found was reasonable given the stigma mental health issues still have. In addition to the medical note, the Health Canada assessment also indicated Rahmani may have been affected by his condition and medication, but this seemed to be discount - ed by the employer. e board found Trans- port Canada discriminated against Rahmani because of his medical disability when it refused to consider his state of health at the time of termination and didn't even consider the possibility of accommodation. "e employer cannot deny that when (Rahmani) was terminated in April 2013, it was aware of a medical situation that could at least partly explain (his) unfortunate act," said the board. Transport Canada was ordered to rein - state Rahmani to his job as of January 2016, which was the date Rahmani was declared by a psychiatrist to be fit to return to work. Due to the seriousness of Rahmani's mis - conduct, he was not entitled to any retro- active pay since his termination. In addi- tion, Transport Canada was ordered to pay Rahmani $15,000 for pain and suffering and $10,000 in special compensation for the dis- crimination he suffered. Rahmani was also required to comply with the treatment plan prescribed by doctors for his condition. For more information see: •Rahmani c. Administrateur general (ministère des Transports), 2016 Carswell- Nat 460 (Can. Public Service Lab. Rel. and Emp. Bd.). Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2016 March 30, 2016 | Canadian Employment Law Today ABOUT THE AUTHOR JEFFREY R. SMITH Jeffrey R. Smith is the editor of Canadian Employment Law Today. He can be reached at jeffrey.r.smith@thomsonreuters.com, or visit www. employmentlawtoday.com for more information.

• Cover