Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada issued an unprecedented ruling. They held that during an outbreak of communicable disease, employers have a positive duty to accommodate employees with disabilities. This ruling emerged from Flynn’s case. He’s not just an employee, he’s someone who was put in danger for having an immunocompromised system due to his arthritis medicine.
Flynn’s condition required him to take medication that suppressed his immune system. This, in turn, made him more susceptible to viral infections, COVID-19 included. His doctor emphasized the seriousness of his situation, stating that Flynn was “at increased risk for developing serious infections that may lead to hospitalization or death.” This administrative mess disrupted Flynn’s life to the point of making normal daily routines nearly impossible.
Definition of Disability Under Canadian Law
Though small, the Supreme Court’s decision serves to uphold its past, narrow definitions of disability. It focuses on actual impairments in everyday life and puts individuals’ rights to be free from discrimination front and center. This jurisprudence, developed in many jurisdictions across Canada, expands our understanding of what disability means. It’s doing so by recognizing the unique challenges employees face, like those of Flynn.
The second important point is that Flynn’s immunocompromised nature created serious issues when his employer required him to work in person when COVID-19 started spreading in the United States. Flynn objected on health grounds and sought other means of protection. Nevertheless, the employer demanded that the employee be physically present at the place of employment, even at risk to his health.
Employer’s Duty to Accommodate
The tribunal found that Flynn’s employer had not met its obligation to accommodate his disability. Even though Flynn spoke up out of concern for his own health and the health risks involved, Flynn’s employer failed to offer any reasonable accommodation. Flynn was to report back to the office, but he did so only for a short time. His coworkers weren’t practicing social distancing.
This repeated failure to accommodate placed Flynn’s health in grave danger. It constituted discrimination on the basis of his disability. The tribunal recognized that by imposing mandatory in-person work, the employer had subjected Flynn to adverse effects related to his condition.
Tribunal’s Decision and Award
In light of the tribunal’s findings, Flynn was awarded considerable damages. You paid an agreed amount for damages, representing two years’ salary of $183,802.59. In short, as a successful complainant, you were granted $25,000 for the injury to your dignity, feelings and self-respect. This award is a reminder to employers of all stripes of the obligation owed to employees with disabilities, especially during health emergencies.
