Case information

Labour relations – Arbitration – Grievances – Unjust dismissal – Administrative law – Boards and tribunals – Reasons – Human rights – Discrimination based on mental or physical disability – Duty to accommodate – Employee terminated after testing positive for drug use – Whether the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal failed to adequately take account of the specific characteristics of the expedited arbitration mechanism known as the Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration in analysing the quality of the reasons provided by the arbitrator in his arbitration award – Whether a labour arbitrator seized with a dismissal that is alleged to be in breach of the employer’s duty to accommodate must order the employee’s reinstatement if the dismissal is in violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6 – Whether, subsidiarily, the arbitrator properly applied the Toronto (City) Board of Education v. O.S.S.T.F., District 15, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 487, criteria in the present case, in light of the Court’s decision in Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses’ Union v. Newfoundland and Labrador (Treasury Board), 2011 SCC 62, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 708 – Whether in applying the standard of reasonableness, the Superior Court and the majority of the Court of Appeal failed to seek to supplement the reasons of the arbitrator before seeking to subvert them – Whether the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal erred in ordering a de novo arbitration rather than returning the file to the same arbitrator for supplementary reasons.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The employee, a locomotive mechanic, operated a train of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company (“the employer”). The train derailed, and the employee was tested to detect the presence of alcohol or drugs in his system. The results of the test indicated that the employee had consumed cocaine within 24 hours of the accident. The employer conducted an investigation, where the employee admitted to being an occasional user of cocaine. Following the investigation, the employer dismissed the employee. The employee grieved the dismissal. The employee subsequently asserted that he had received a diagnosis of cocaine addiction from his family physician and provided a referral from the family physician to a psychiatrist. At the hearing of the grievance, the employee submitted a letter showing that he had been successfully participating in a rehabilitation program. The arbitrator found that the employee had a disability which warranted accommodation to the point of undue hardship. He allowed the grievance in part and ordered reinstatement of the employee, with certain conditions.