On August 28, 2017, a worker employed requested a leave of absence to pursue treatment for ongoing mental health issues. According to the Worker, the supervisor told him the Manager would let him know what his options were the following day, and gave the Worker permission to take the rest of the day off to initiate treatment.
The following day, the Worker met with the Manager and was informed his position with the Employer was terminated. The Worker stated that being terminated caused him to immediately suffer an anxiety attack. Following the termination, the Worker states that he sank into depression and found it difficult to purse mental health treatment needed.
On March 12, 2018, the Worker filed a complaint and by way of an amendment provided additional information regarding the Manager's conduct in October 2017 and May 2018, which he believed were discrimination events. Both events involve the Manager making statements about what took place at the end of August 2017.
Since the alleged discrimination occurred on August 29, 2017, the Worker’s complaint was late-filed.
The Tribunal dismissed the complaint against the Employer and Manager. In doing so, the Tribunal considered the time limit set out in s. 22 of the Human Rights Code and whether acceptance of a late-filed complaint was in the public interest. The Tribunal determined that it was not in the public interest to accept a late-filed complaint based on source of income.
Fasken represented the Employer and Manager on all aspects of the case.
