Employee with illness caused by office environment awarded $18,000 after new manager ended work-from-home agreement
A government employer must pay $18,000 for its reluctance to allow an employee who got sick from the office environment to work from home, the Canada Public Service Labour Relations Board has ruled.
Nathalie Cyr was a project manager with the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development – Service Canada who had been working in public service since 1992. In February 2004, she started working at Service Canada’s offices at Place du Portage, a building in Gatineau, Que.
Cyr had never experienced any health problems before, so she became concerned when, after about a month in the new building, she began feeling tired on a regular basis. She also began experiencing headaches and sinus pain shortly after arriving at work each day. Once she went home at the end of the day, the symptoms would gradually disappear, only to return at work the next day.
On June 1, 2004, Cyr reached an agreement with Service Canada where she could work from home three days of the week and be in the office for two days. However, the director wasn’t a fan of telework and in 2005 decided all employees working from home should return to the office. The director agreed to let Cyr still work from home part of the time because of her health issues, but wanted Cyr in the office three days each week instead of two.
The extra day in the office took its toll on Cyr and her symptoms worsened. s. Eventually, on April 28, 2006, she obtained a medical certificate stating that she suffered from environmental hypersensitivity caused by the workplace at Place du Portage. The doctor recommended Cyr should work from home for the foreseeable future and Service Canada approved her working from home full-time.
New supervisor didn’t like telework
In September 2006, Cyr began reporting to a new supervisor, Jo-Ann Dumont. Dumont was aware of Cyr’s situation and Service Canada’s accommodation but she didn’t like teleworking, especially for senior-level employees such as Cyr. She asked for more information about Cyr’s condition, which made Cyr anxious and caused tension between them.
In November 2006, Dumont informed Cyr that Service Canada would charge her one hour of sick leave for her weekly visits to the doctor, which had not been done before. She also reorganized the division, giving Cyr new responsibilities. However, those responsibilities required Cyr to work at the office. She would be allowed to work in another building in the complex, but Cyr balked at the proposition because the same air circulated through the entire complex.
Cyr made it clear the request to report to work at the office contravened her doctor’s recommendation. She obtained another medical certificate on Dec. 20 that specified she was sensitive to air pollutants in buildings with mechanical ventilation systems like Place du Portage, even if the air quality met accepted standards. Dumont noted she had seen Cyr in other buildings with mechanical ventilation systems and asked for another medical evaluation to determine a date when she could return to work in such an office. Cyr obtained a more detailed certificate — which cost her $300 because it wasn’t covered — and said she would not return to work in any buildings with mechanical ventilation systems.
Cyr also requested equipment necessary for her to work at home. After Cyr prodded Dumont, eventually she was given everything except a computer and keyboard tray, which Service Canada claimed it didn’t have the budget for. Cyr was able to use a proper computer when she came into the office.
The board accepted the evidence that Cyr suffered from environmental hypersensitivity and that constituted a disability under the Canadian Human Rights Act and the collective agreement. Initially, Service Canada accommodated Cyr by allowing her to work from home part of the week, even though it didn’t have a medical certificate at the time.
However, when Dumont took over as supervisor, the attitude towards Cyr changed, said the board. Though Dumont had full knowledge of the circumstances, she questioned the accommodations, which was a failure of the employer’s duty to make “sustained and prolonged efforts to accommodate.”
When Cyr provided a medical certificate, rather than meeting the limitations described, Dumont asked for another, more detailed certificate, which cost Cyr money to get. Rather than working with Cyr to accommodate her disability, Service Canada continued to question her status and put more of a burden on her, said the board.
The board also found Service Canada’s tardiness in providing Cyr with a proper computer to work at home was a failure to accommodate through negligence. The fact that Cyr had all the equipment she needed at the office but not at home was discrimination, said the board.
