Employee claimed resignation was impulsive and caused by mental illness but his actions showed a clear thought process
An arbitrator has denied an Ontario worker’s claim that stress and depression caused him to resign and he should get his job back.
The 40-year-old worker was a professional engineer for Ontario Power Generation (OPG), a utilities company. OPG recruited the workeri out of university in 1999 after he completed a Masters degree in engineering. He worked without any major problems until Jan. 1, 2010, when he went on sick leave.
The worker’s sick leave was due to severe mental stress and depression from which he was suffering at the time. His condition became unmanageable when his marriage broke up, necessitating the sick leave. He collected long-term disability (LTD) benefits from OPG’s insurer, Great-West Life (GWL). The benefits were dependent on the worker maintaining his status as an OPG employee. In addition, the worker had to remain under continuing treatment by a physician or certified psychiatrist to continue receiving LTD benefits.
Employee wanted to go to India for treatment
During his sick leave, the worker took regular medication for depression, panic, insomnia and anxiety. He also took a six-week mental health day-treatment program in July and August 2010, but he felt it didn’t help him. Around the same time, The worker and his psychiatrist decided that his mental health might improve if he attended an ashram, or yoga retreat, in India for six weeks. They felt the natural and peaceful surroundings of the ashram would help the workeri’s mental recovery.
The worker took the proposal to GWL, but the insurer didn’t think the worker’s condition would be significantly improved by such a trip. It also felt the worker could take yoga and meditation treatment in Canada. GWL consulted a psychiatrist, who didn’t think yoga was better than medication and psychotherapy.
The worker continued to push his ashram proposal to OPG and GWL, who remained cool to the idea. The insurer told the worker if he went to the ashram in India, it would halt his LTD benefits because it wouldn’t be part of the workeri’s approved treatment. the worker claimed he felt extra pressure because of the refusals that caused panic attacks. GWL requested more medical information so it could evaluate the worker’s condition and asked him to undergo an independent medical assessment. The worker refused, saying he was too stressed to go through with the examination.
In September 2010, the worker wrote to OPG’s CEO complaining the company was harassing him by threatening to suspend his LTD benefits. Near the end of the month, he suffered a panic attack that required him to go to the hospital. Shortly thereafter, GWL wrote to the worker, reiterating its position that the treatment in India was not linked to his approved psychiatric treatment and it would not pay any of his expenses. It asked him again to undergo an independent assessment so it could better understand his treatment needs. GWL’s consulting psychiatrist also spoke to the worker’s psychiatrist and reported that the worker needed “to learn to manage his symptoms in the context of the normal stresses of his job and personal life, not just in the tranquil environment of an ashram.”
Frustrated, the worker decided to go to India anyway. He left on Oct. 18, 2010, and his psychiatrist gave GWL contact information for another psychiatrist in India who would follow his treatment. GWL then stopped his LTD benefits.
After learning of his benefits cancellation, the worker emailed his supervisor, OPG’s vice-president, an OPG wellness representative and his union steward, saying he was resigning his position at OPG. He requested an employment letter and that his personal effects be shipped to his Ontario address.
The worker’s supervisor responded, asking the worker for a confirmation of what items he had in his possession that were OPG property. The worker emailed back, saying he couldn’t confirm because he was in India. The worker also exchanged emails with the union steward a few days later, indicating he would call the insurance company to cancel his car insurance and asked the steward, who was also his friend, to give his car to “someone who needs it.” The worker sent a hard copy of his resignation letter on Nov. 2 from India, which OPG received on Nov. 22.
Resignation blamed on mental illness
On Nov. 14, the worker emailed the wellness representative and said his resignation was impulsive and “a symptom of my illness.” He said the back-and-forth with GWL and OPG built up his stress and contributed to his decision. The union filed a grievance, claiming the worker lacked the capacity and judgment to resign and should be reinstated or compensated for OPG’s failure to recognize the extent of his mental illness.
The arbitrator noted that, generally, a resignation statement should be taken seriously, and when an employer accepts that statement, it should take a lot to “countermand the termination of the employment relationship. The arbitrator found that the worker’s resignation email discussed his pension, where to send his personal effects and intention to send a hard copy. He also discussed his car insurance and the overall tone seemed to convey that the worker’s decision was thought-out and not impulsive. He followed this up with other emails over a few days that discussed his resignation with various contacts at OPG, including his union representative and supervisor, which demonstrated his “appreciation of what he was doing.”
The arbitrator also found that there was no medical evidence indicating the worker was unable to make a rational decision at the time of his resignation. The worker had told his psychiatrist more than 10 days after he retracted his resignation that he was depressed, didn’t have clear judgment and regretted his signing, but there was no official medical opinion that the worker didn’t have the capacity to make such a decision. Though the worker claimed the resignation was an impulsive act, but the fact he clearly communicated with several OPG staff, his union steward and emailed a signed version of his resignation four days later, as well as though of many details, showed otherwise. The resignation retraction appeared to be a change of heart rather than a change in mental lucidity, said the arbitrator.
The arbitrator upheld the resignation, but felt the fact that mental illness was a factor in the resignation and the severance of LTD benefits warranted some compensation for the worker. OPG was ordered to pay the worker one year’s pay for his length of service and the “human rights issues” in the circumstances.
For more information see:
