Employee's alcoholism didn't play a role in dismissal for threatening behaviour: Tribunal
A British Columbia employer had just cause to dismiss an employee for making profane and threatening calls to other employees, despite the employee’s claims of a mental disability as a factor in the dismissal, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has ruled.
The employee was a driver of a HandyDART bus for MVT Canadian Bus in Vancouver. HandyDART buses provide door-to-door shared rides for people with physical or mental disabilities that require help using public transit.
The bus driver claimed to suffer from stress, depression and alcoholism. On March 17, 2011, he was the subject of complaints from two customers. Feeling stressed, the bus driver pulled himself off his route and left his vehicle at the union hall. When he got home, he started drinking for the first time in three years. While he was drinking, he called his chief dispatcher and left a message saying he would be sick the next day. In the message, he called the dispatcher names and threatened her.
The next day, the bus driver continued to drink alcohol and left a message for his depot manager that called the manager a profane name. He later called the chief dispatcher again and left a vulgar message.
On March 21, 2011, MVT terminated the bus driver’s employment for leaving the “offensive, threatening, abusive and profane” messages, which it considered gross misconduct, which significantly affected one of his targets. The driver filed a human rights complaint, arguing his conduct was the result of a mental disability, claiming his calls were made under the influence of stress, anger, intoxication and medication, and MVT discriminated against him by terminating him instead of providing him with assistance and accommodation.
MVT maintained that the bus driver’s behaviour was not caused by alcohol but rather by “overt anger, hostility and aggression. It also argued that is wasn’t aware of his alcoholism, stress or depression and he didn’t bring any such issues to its attention. As a result, they could not have been factors in his dismissal, said the employer.
The tribunal found MVT was able to prove there was a bona fide reasonable justification for terminating the bus driver’s employment. MVT was legitimately concerned for the safety of its workplace after the threats the bus driver made and his gross misconduct provided just cause for dismissal. In addition, the bus driver didn’t provide any medical evidence of his disabilities or any proof he was intoxicated when he made the threatening calls.
