Employer conducted 'biomechanical examination' of worker
A truck driver for a poultry processor in Saskatoon became bored and angry when he was shifted to a plant job while the employer conducted a functional assessment of his capabilities.
Terry Hoet had worked at Prairie Pride Natural Foods since 2008. Before that, he worked for 15 years as a ham packer. But the repetitive nature of the job gave him tendinitis.
In 2012, Hoet disclosed his previous injury and the employer did accommodate him as he only drove curtain trailers.
The roll-up style trailers required the use of a hand crank, which caused Hoet pain when he drove them.
On Nov. 28, 2015, Prairie Pride advised its drivers that a new climate-controlled truck would be added to the driver rotation and each driver must drive it for one week or be terminated.
Hoet told Sandy Zerebeski, logistics manager, that he wanted an exception due to his tendonitis. He was told to get a doctor’s note, which he did on Dec. 4.
The note said Hoet should “avoid lifting and repetitive work,” and Hoet testified he gave it to Zerebeski or Gaetan Duret, plant manager, but neither one recalled receiving the note.
On Dec. 15, Duret provided Hoet with a form letter that was filled out by the doctor. It was returned with the limitation saying he “cannot use ratchets.”
Duret said this was troubling because all of the trailers have ratchets of some sort and the limitation meant Hoet could not operate any trailers.
On Dec. 23, Hoet returned to his family doctor and had him conduct a more thorough assessment, which said: “Patient can use only modified trailers. No repetitive movements of wrists and elbows.”
Duret then contacted Bourassa & Associates to conduct a full functional assessment of Hoet.
On Dec. 28, Hoet was scheduled to drive the climate-controlled truck. He was told to report to the plant for modified duties, instead of driving.
And because he was on the modified work plan, he was not offered any overtime, as was company policy.
Bourassa completed its “full biomechanical examination” on Jan. 28.
“At this point, we feel it reasonable that he remain using only the curtain-style trailer due to the history of his condition, his biomechanical status and the functional testing that was completed. He can immediately resume his duties as a driver on the curtain-style trailer,” said the report.
The union, United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 1400, grieved the decision on Dec. 30, and argued Hoet lost out on overtime opportunities during the modified work scheduling between Dec. 28 and Jan. 31.
Arbitrator William Hood (with board members Cory Cozart and Rick Corvino) dismissed the grievance.
“It was reasonable for the employer to remove (Hoet) from his regular duties and place him on modified duties in the plant for the short period pending the functional assessment. The employer acted reasonably in the accommodation process,” said Hood.
Some of the blame for what happened should be placed on Hoet, according to the arbitrator.
“The alleged loss of overtime to (Hoet) may have been avoided if he had provided sufficient medical information in the first instance.”
“There is no evidence that the employer was acting in bad faith or made an arbitrary decision when it decided to place (Hoet) on modified duties in the plant pending the functional assessment. The decision was made pursuant to the obligation to accommodate, not discriminate, and prevent bodily harm,” said Hood.
Reference: Prairie Pride Natural Foods and United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1400. William Hood — arbitrator. Leah Schatz for the employer. Sachio Longo for the employee. Feb. 28, 2018. 2018 CarswellSask 97
