In a recent case before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal an employee alleged that he was discriminated against in the course of his employment on the basis of disability. The employee worked as a sales agent for the Respondents, which required him to work closely with auto dealerships to obtain discounted rates on cars for clients.

The employee was clean and sober for eight months before he started work for his employer, but spent 23 years prior battling addiction to crack-cocaine, including attending numerous residential addiction recovery programs over the years. The employee was sober for the duration of his employment, with the exception of two weekends in the summer of 2009.

The employer first became aware of the employee's addiction early in his employment when he asked him to go out for a drink after work. The employee declined the offer, and explained that he was a recovering addict. The employee testified that his relapse in 2009 did not affect his work; but he decided to tell his employer nonetheless about his setback.

Shortly after his relapse, the employee requested payment from his employer of his outstanding commissions; however, when he requested payment, he was advised that he would not get paid until he checked himself into a detox program. His employer went so far as to lure the employee into his car with the promise of going to a bank machine to pay him and, instead, attempted to force him to enter a rehab facility.

The situation deteriorated further when the employee was called a "f--king crack-head" by his employer during a telephone call, when the employee was attempting to discuss the reasons behind why his commissions remained unpaid. The employee gave evidence that when he was called a "crack-head" he was hurt and shocked, having been clean for four months, he felt as though it was "a slap in the face".

Later the same month the employee learned that his employer sent an email to the other sales agents stating that the employee was suspected to have been stealing for months and "...is a former crack head". The employer also contacted some of the employee's business contacts at dealerships and told them that the company was contemplating possible legal action against the employee. The email referred to the company having "worked with [the employee] to curtail his crack addiction" and help him into rehab the past year.

The employee resigned from his employment on November 19, 2009.

The employee was awarded damages in the amount of $25,000.00 for the violation of his right to be free from discrimination in the workplace, as well as compensation for injury to his feelings, dignity and self-respect. In addition, the Tribunal found that the employee's resignation from the company was a direct result of the treatment he received from his employer and he was also awarded damages for lost wages for three months following the end of his employment.

Halliday v. Van Toen Innovations Inc., 2013 HRTO 583

About the Author:

Christine N. Westlake is an Associate at Koskie Minsky LLP. She is a member of the Employment Law Group at Koskie Minsky and practises in the areas of employment law, commercial litigation and professional negligence.

In the area of employment law, Christine advocates on behalf of both employers and employees relating to issues involving wrongful dismissal, breach of contract, discrimination, disability and other employment related claims. Christine is actively involved in the Ontario Bar Association Labour and Employment Law Section, and is the current Editor of the OBA Labour and Employment Law Newsletter.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.