Corporation wanted information on medical restrictions before allowing worker back on limited duties
Canada Post was entitled to remove a disabled Ontario employee from work until it received updated medical information it could use to accommodate her, the Ontario Arbitration Board has ruled.
Marlene Salmon was a part-time worker for Canada Post who injured her shoulder at work on May 25, 2006. She went on workers’ compensation benefits soon after. However, she was not completely disabled and was able to do limited duties, so Canada Post brought her back to work with light duties that accommodated her medical restrictions while she underwent physiotherapy.
Salmon’s regular duties involved machine feeding and sweeping all day. Her light duties involved a rotation of duties featuring 30 minutes on a machine, 30 minutes of sorting and 30 minutes of sweeping. This was following by a break and then she would start the rotation again until lunch. After lunch, she would spend the afternoon sorting, which didn’t aggravate her injury.
In December 2006, Canada Post placed Salmon on a four-week work hardening program with the hope she would be ready to return to regular duties at the end of the four weeks.
However, on Jan. 22, 2007, the day she was to resume regular duties, Salmon presented Canada Post with a medical note that stated she would risk injury if she performed her regular duties. Canada Post decided it needed more medical information to clarify her condition and plan the next steps for accommodation, so it gave her an evaluation form to be completed by her doctor and placed her on paid leave until it received the completed form. During this time, she received benefits based on an average of her weekly earnings over the previous 52 weeks.
Salmon’s doctor completed the form and she returned it to Canada Post. On March 18, 2007, she returned to work performing the same modified duties she had been assigned previously.
The union filed a grievance on Salmon’s behalf, claiming compensation for the eight weeks she had been on leave. It argued Canada Post was required to provide Salmon with work while her doctor performed the medical evaluation and demanded compensation for what she would have earned had she been working during that time.
The board found Canada Post was within its rights to seek medical clarification following Salmon’s inability to return to regular duties after the work-hardening program so it could determine the next steps for accommodation. Removing her from work until it knew the extent of her restrictions was “the cautious approach” that was appropriate to prevent further injury to Salmon, said the board.
