Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JULY 2015

Addiction At The Workplace: When Should "Denial" Be A Consideration In Accommodation Strategies?

The appellant's approach amounts to a suggestion that even an employee in a highly safety sensitive position who knows precisely what he is doing can unilaterally and in a secretive manner disregard the profound safety obligations of his employment not only to the employer but to his co-workers.

CanadaEmployment and HR

The appellant's approach amounts to a suggestion that even an employee in a highly safety sensitive position who knows precisely what he is doing can unilaterally and in a secretive manner disregard the profound safety obligations of his employment not only to the employer but to his co-workers. The absolution for doing so is said to arise from error or misconception on the part of that employee – namely denial. In our view, legitimizing such a subjective manner of defining one's safety-related employment duties in hazardous work environments loses touch with the test in Meiorin, and with the objectives of anti-discrimination laws.(Emphasis added)

The Alberta Court of Appeal recently released a decision on addiction.  The decision, Stewart v. Elk Valley Coal Corporation, 2015 ABCA 225 (CanLII) is a must read for those dealing with addiction in the workplace.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from