The Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board failed to accommodate the needs of an injured worker with psychological conditions, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has decided. The HRTO found that the WSIB failed to consider the impact of its administrative processes and poor communication of decisions on the worker, in light of his special needs due to his psychological condition.
The worker was injured at work in 2002. He was receiving full "Loss of Earnings" benefits from the WSIB. He had a number of psychological conditions including anxiety, depression marked by suicidal ideation, a pain disorder with psychiatric features, personality disorder and Attention Deficit Disorder.
The HRTO, in its decision, noted that the worker had a "bitter and tumultuous" relationship with a WSIB adjudicator. At one point, the worker asked for accommodation, claiming that his "psychological disability . . . is exacerbated to dangerous and harmful levels by dealing with the WSIB . . ."
The HRTO held that the WSIB provides a "service" and that, therefore, the Human Rights Code requires it to do so in a non-discriminatory manner.
The HRTO found that the worker's experience dealing with the WSIB would have been frustrating for most people. His experience "included contradictory requests for information, contradictory information about what was allowed and what was not, very extensive delays, lack of explanation for various decisions that were made, and seemingly arbitrary and excessive demands for information that was not necessary."
The HRTO stated:
"The processes and systems become discriminatory because of the failure to appreciate their effect on this particular injured worker because of his multiple disabilities and special needs.
"In coming to this conclusion, I am quite aware that the applicant's sometimes extreme reactions to stress can make it very difficult to deal with him. On the occasions when the applicant was self-represented in this proceeding, it was often very difficult to proceed with the adjudication of the issues."
In conclusion, the HRTO decided:
"In conclusion, I accept the evidence of the applicant and Dr. Cobrin that the applicant experiences a significantly heightened level of stress and frustration because of his various disabilities. I accept Dr. Cobrin's evidence that the applicant has a very limited capacity to deal with stress and that his dealings with the WSIB in particular result in acute exacerbation of his disability, including suicidal ideation. I accept that these symptoms eventually caused the applicant to not seek entitlement to health care benefits, including entitlement for treatment for acute psychological crisis.
"I find that the respondent failed to consider the impact of its administrative processes and poor communication of decisions on the applicant in light of the special needs he has as a result of his disabilities."
"I conclude that these circumstances mean that the respondent infringed the applicant's rights under the Code."
The HRTO stated that it would schedule a one-day hearing to hear submissions about possible remedies to which the worker would be entitled under the Human Rights Code, given the WSIB's violation of the Human Rights Code in its dealings with him.
Lawson v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2017 HRTO 851 (CanLII)
For more information, visit our Occupational Health & Safety Law blog at www.occupationalhealthandsafetylaw.com
About Dentons
Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways. Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons' global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local, national and global needs of private and public clients of any size in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries. www.dentons.com
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. Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
