Grievance Case Summary - G-513

The Grievor was diagnosed with medical conditions which prevented him from performing front line operational police work. The Force moved him to a town where he did both local and remote temporary administrative duties. He was comfortable in the town, and received good evaluations there. A few years later, the Force decided it could no longer employ him in the town, in light of his limitations, and resourcing issues. It accommodated him by offering him a similar job that met his medical profile, but was located elsewhere. He reluctantly accepted the job, and relocated. The move, isolation, and new setting affected him. His medical conditions worsened. He went off-duty sick.

The Grievor sought a compassionate transfer back to the town. He provided reports from his specialists which linked his worsened health to the move, and which indicated that he could likely go back to work upon returning to the town. The Force denied his request. It later gave him two options. He could return to his job in the new location, or agree to a medical discharge package. The Grievor felt he had no choice but to accept the discharge. He grieved the Force's decision to deny his compassionate transfer request. He viewed it as a contravention of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and as a failure to satisfy the duty to accommodate.

The ERC found that the grievance was really all about whether the Force met its duty to accommodate the Grievor's disabilities, and not about a Charter breach. It then reached two key conclusions. First, the Grievor proved that the Force treated him adversely because of his disabilities. Once the Force obtained medical evidence ascribing his poor health to the move, and indicating that he could work elsewhere, it had a duty to re-engage the accommodation process. Yet the Force did not do that. Rather, it wrongly directed the Grievor to either return to the new job despite being verifiably sick, or to take an unwanted discharge. Second, the Force failed to show that it ever did a proper search for accommodation options, or that it accommodated the Grievor up to the point of undue hardship. While it claimed to have carried out a full job search, the record did not verify this. It was also unclear why rebundling, or remote work options were not more closely considered, given that the Grievor had just done the latter in the town, with good evaluations. Moreover, the Force neither consulted the Grievor during the accommodation process nor apprised him of efforts being made, contrary to the requirements of Treasury Board Policy, and the recommendations of a Health Services Officer and a Return to Work Coordinator.

Lastly, the ERC explained that it could not say what the proper accommodation outcome should have been, as both parties failed to submit information that was critical to making such a finding.

The ERC recommended to the Commissioner of the RCMP that he allow the grievance in part, and make two findings in support of that decision. First, the Force should have reopened the accommodation process and carried out a sufficient search of accommodation options after the new job did not work out. Second, on the basis of the record alone, it is not possible to reach any further conclusions regarding what decision should have been made in the Grievor's case. The ERC recommended that the Commissioner of the RCMP apologize to the Grievor for the fact that the Force did not satisfy its duty to accommodate his circumstances.

The Commissioner has rendered a decision in this matter, as summarized by his office:

The Commissioner found the grievance moot, as the Grievor had passed away during the Level II process. However, the Commissioner exercised his discretion to rule on the merits and allowed the grievance in part, as recommended by the ERC.

The Commissioner agreed with the ERC that the RCMP failed in its duty to accommodate the Grievor by not reopening the search for accommodation after it became clear that the Grievor was medically or psychologically unable to continue in a position which was originally thought to accommodate his disability.

The Commissioner offered an apology.