Canada: Duty To Accommodate: If Only We Knew Back Then What We know Now. Actually, We Did And The Complaint Should Have Been Dismissed A Long Time Ago

Last Updated: March 13 2015
Article by Brian Johnston QC and Michelle Black

IBM moved to have this complaint dismissed at a preliminary stage because of the Commission's delay in bringing the complaint forward for many years after it was first brought to IBM's attention.  I had reason in dealing with that motion to review the correspondence at the early stages of the complaint, and in particular the responses to the complaint provided by IBM's corporate counsel.  I was impressed then by these responses ... I can still go back to the responses and see in them a complete answer.  The responses were factual and complete ... I regret that after so many years and the expenditure of so much, [IBM] counsel's responses were not accepted by the Commission then and the complaint dismissed.

LeFrense v IBM Canada Ltd, 2015 CanLII 1720 (NS HRC)

In a decision recently released, Nova Scotia Human Rights Board of Inquiry Chair Walter Thompson, Q.C., held that IBM had accommodated former employee Roger LeFrense to the point of undue hardship and dismissed his claim which had been filed more than 8 years previously.


Roger LeFrense worked at IBM as a Systems Service Representative ("SSR"), meaning that he, along with a small team of fellow SSRs, had to respond to IBM customer demands at any time of the day or night.  The SSRs shared a schedule of on-call shifts and could reasonably expect to be called out to work anywhere within a large geographical area of Nova Scotia.

When Mr. LeFrense was diagnosed with sleep apnea in April 2004, he requested that he not be required to work the on-call and night shifts.  He was given a temporary reprieve but told that on-call shifts were part of the job.  Mr. LeFrense subsequently went off on sick leave – first for the apnea and then for a couple of unrelated surgeries.  His doctor cleared him to return for work close to a year later but there were restrictions on the hours he could work and the times he could work them.  Specifically, his doctor said that he could not drive at night and could not work on-call shifts.

IBM worked with Manulife, its claims adjudicator and rehabilitation advisor, to create an accommodation of the regular SSR duties that would respect Mr. LeFrense's medical restrictions while still balancing those restrictions with the needs of IBM and the other SSRs on the team.  The proposal required that Mr. LeFrense would work regular 8 hour days Monday – Friday as well as a maximum of two Saturdays per month and the occasional 9-hour day (if he needed to stay longer to finish a task).

This proposal was sent in September 2005 to Mr. LeFrense's doctor who "initially had a positive reaction" but, after consultation with Mr. LeFrense, crossed out "two Saturdays", replacing it with "one Saturday" and added that there should be no night driving. IBM was not able to accommodate this type of arrangement and, at the time, did not have any other positions to offer Mr. LeFrense.  It was not until June 2006 that IBM, by moving an employee out of a parts specialist role, was able to accommodate Mr. LeFrense by offering this alternative to his SSR position.

The parts specialist position was a 9-5 job which, because it had less stress and demands than the SSR position, also paid a reduced salary. At the return to work meeting where the parts position was proposed to Mr. LeFrense, he asked one question – was the salary negotiable? Upon being told it was not, he nonetheless accepted the position and worked there successfully for several years with no on-call shifts and no night driving.  Despite his apparent satisfaction with the new arrangement, Mr. LeFrense filed a human rights complaint, saying he had been discriminated against on the basis of his disability and that he should be awarded damages for lost salary.  Mr. LeFrense claimed that a fellow SSR had been given accommodation for a medical condition and that he, Mr. LeFrense, just wanted the same treatment.

The Decision

The hearing took place over 9 days beginning February 3, 2014 and concluding December 4, 2014.  Testimony from two of Mr. LeFrense's former managers, a former SSR, an IBM human resources manager and others made it clear that IBM did what it could to accommodate Mr. LeFrense.

When Mr. LeFrense said he could not work his next on-call shift back in 2004, he was given the time off (meaning that another SSR had to take the shift) and when he presented his doctor's note saying that he could not work until his sleep apnea was further delineated, IBM helped facilitate the short- and then long-term disability process.  Mr. LeFrense was maintained on disability (paid for by IBM) while IBM looked for another position for him.  When a position was eventually found that met Mr. LeFrense's needs, IBM held a meeting and gave Mr. LeFrense an opportunity to discuss the proposed job.  Other than asking about the salary, Mr. LeFrense had no comments, and he certainly did not indicate his plan to accept the job but, at the same time, proceed with a discrimination claim.

For a claim of discrimination to succeed, a complainant must first prove that there was prima facie discrimination, after which the onus shifts to the respondent to prove that it accommodated the complainant to the point of undue hardship.  In this case, the Chair debated whether there was any actual discrimination to begin with:

As Justice L'Heureux-Dube says, discrimination is arbitrary and based on preconceived ideas concerning personal characteristics which do not really affect a person's ability to do a job.  There is none of that in this case.   Everything in this process is inconsistent with the arbitrary nature of discrimination. 

Nonetheless, Chair Thompson recognized the low threshold for prima facie discrimination and went on to consider whether IBM had accommodated Mr. LeFrense to the point of undue hardship.  He found that the complainant, by virtue of his disability, was no longer able to fulfill the basic obligations associated with the employment relationship for the foreseeable future, relying upon the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Hydro-Quebec.  Important in the Board Chair's decision was the employment context; the complainant worked in a team environment where team members shared overtime, on-call and outside normal business hours responsibilities.  The Board Chair was satisfied that, at some point, a team member's absence would become unmanageable and would impose undue hardship on other team members as well as the employer, IBM.

Ultimately, Chair Thompson found that IBM "proceeded throughout in a systematic, measured and thoughtful way through the processes of this large and well established organization" and that he could "find no fault" in the process IBM undertook.  Regarding the fellow SSR (Lew Smith) whom Mr. LeFrense claimed had been provided the same accommodation that he was seeking, the Chair stated:

Circumstances alter cases ... Simply because something was worked out for one person does not set a precedent for everyone else, but in any event, I am satisfied that the circumstances of Mr. Smith's  participation in the team, even after his heart attack, were different than Mr. LeFrense's needs.  Mr. Smith worked extra time.  Mr. LeFrense's needs demanded no on-call work, that he work nine to five and limited any extra hours to one or two Saturdays per month with little or no night driving.  There is no evidence that he could have put in the extra hours at the times Mr. Smith apparently did, even if indeed they were not "on-call".

In discussing the fact that Mr. LeFrense, through his doctor, changed the September 2005 return to work proposal, the Chair stated:

[a]t some point ... we have to defer to an employer's good faith efforts to accommodate an employee and manage the work place.  We do not, I think, want to put ourselves in a position where we are second guessing management's reasonable and good faith decisions on accommodation, nor do we want to put ourselves in a position where we are fiddling with a return to work plan, saying that one is acceptable, but another with a minor variation is not. 

The Board Chair also identified the matter as being more of a workplace dispute than a proper human rights complaint.

What This Means for Employers

The accommodation process must involve communication among all interested parties.  If the person to be accommodated rejects the proposed accommodation, it is expected that there will be some further dialogue until, ideally, the parties can arrive at a satisfactory arrangement.  However, this does not mean that the employee should "fiddle" with a proposed plan until it is entirely to his liking.  The job is the job and the extent to which the employer can alter the job to suit the employee's restrictions is limited.  The employee cannot wait around for what he thinks is the perfect accommodation and then, barring that perfect accommodation, resort to the "hammer of the human rights complaint process".

What is particularly interesting about this decision is that, in the Chair's opinion, this matter should never have progressed to a Board of Inquiry.  In 2006, when IBM first received correspondence from the Human Rights Commission indicating that it was investigating a possible case of discrimination, IBM responded quickly and thoroughly.  It produced the relevant documents it had available, explained the process it underwent, and was clear about both how it accommodated Mr. LeFrense and why it could accommodate him no further.  Chair Thompson said:

Without rhetoric, [IBM] persuasively established that IBM had worked Mr. LeFrense's disability seriously, concluded that it could not manage his demands, and found him another position.

Even though IBM's thorough responses did not result in a dismissal of the claim when it first arose (as the Chair suggested should have happened), the Chair's comments about how IBM "persuasively" provided a response during the Commission's investigation suggests that the initial way in which an employer responds to a complaint is important.  Having the documentation available and ready to submit, as well as a narrative from the employer's perspective, could (and should) go a long way towards advancing the employer's position.

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Brian Johnston QC
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions