Canadian Safety Reporter - sample

5 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2017 News | May 2017 | CSR Injured employee's dismissal not discriminatory: Tribunal Small employer didn't have modified work available and sincerely believed worker submitted false medical note BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ONTARIO employer did not discriminate against an injured worker when it didn't have work to fit his restrictions and later fired him for what it believed to be a fraudulent medical note, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has found. Pardeep Chodha was an as- sembler for Times Kitchen and Bath, a producer of kitchen and bathroom cabinetry in Toronto. Chodha was hired on April 21, 2014. A few weeks into his employ- ment with Times Kitchen — on June 2 — Chodha was moving a heavy piece of cabinetry with a co-worker when he starting feel- ing pain in his back. He left work to see his doctor, who referred him to a chiropractor. On June 4, he provided a note from the chi- ropractor and applied for work- ers' compensation benefits. The doctor's note — which Chodha presented to the owner and president of Times Kitchen — stated that Chodha had sus- tained an injury to his neck and back and he should avoid bend- ing, lifting, and standing for more than 20 minutes for the next four weeks. Chodha came to work again on June 9 request- ing modified duties, but the owner told him he had no work to fit his restrictions and he was sending two other employees home due to a shortage of work. The owner's suspicion was raised later, on June 12, when processing paperwork for the workers' compensation claim when he noticed the date on the note was Feb. 6, 2014. Since this was several months be- fore Chodha began working for Times Kitchen, he decided Chodha was being dishonest. He terminated Chodha's employ- ment soon after, on June 26. The following week, the On- tario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) deter- mined that Chodha had suffered a work-related injury to his back and he was unable to perform his job duties. As a result, Chodha was granted loss-of-earnings benefits for his time off work. Times Kitchen issued a record of employment to Chodha indi- cating he had been dismissed be- cause he "submitted injury paper not related with Times Kitchen." Controversy over date of medical note Chodha claimed that the note he submitted was dated "02 06 2014," which referred to June 2, the date of his injury. He accused Times Kitchen's owner of chang- ing the "02" to "Feb." and then us- ing it as an excuse to fire him. He filed a human rights complaint alleging his dismissal amounted to discrimination because of dis- ability because the fact he had been injured on the job and had reported it to the WSIB was the reason for termination —which also prevented him from re- ceiving workers' compensation benefits. Further to his claim, he presented a note from his chiro- practor stating that he was ini- tially assessed on June 2 and had "never been seen by me on Feb. 6, 2014." Chodha also claimed the company's refusal to accom- modate him with modified duties was also discrimination. A WSIB re-employment claims manager found Times Kitchen had terminated Chod- ha's employment "because of his injury and claim for benefits," which was a breach of the re-em- ployment obligations under the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Act. Times Kitchen was ordered to co-operate in the return-to-work process and of- fer Chodha's job back or face a $73,000 fine. Times Kitchen indicated it was prepared to re-employ Chodha and developed a return-to-work plan with modified work duties — including assistance and re- duced work hours — with con- sultation from the WSIB. However, Chodha eventually decided he didn't want to return to work for Times Kitchen be- cause of how he had been treated. Credit: Shutterstock/create jobs 51 Employer > pg. 8 Company's owner noticed the date on the doctor's note pre-dated the employee's time with the company

• Cover