In Greidanus v Inter Pipeline Limited, 2023 AHRC 31, Member Oshionbo of the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal had the following situation:
The Complainant applied for a safety sensitive job and was accepted subject to a pre-hire drug test.
He failed the test as it was shown that he had THC in his system.
The Company then revoked the offer of employment.
The Complainant then told the Company for the first time that he was taking medical cannabis for a PTSD condition.
The Tribunal ruled that since the employer had no knowledge of the Complainants’ disability BEFORE they retracted the offer of employment, the decision to retract the offer was not discriminatory.
The Tribunal also ruled that there was no duty to inquire nor to accommodate because there was no evidence of prima facie discrimination in the first place.
My Comments :
This case emphasizes that there must be evidence which shows the employer knew of or ought to have known of the disability in order to prove that an act of the employer was discriminatory.
However everybody knows that cannabis ( which is perfectly legal ) can be used for either valid medical purposes ( as it was in this case) or just to get stoned.
Therefore since the employer relied solely on the fact that the Complainant had THC in his system, should they not have a positive obligation to inquire of him why he was using cannabis to see if there was a valid medical reason ?
Is not asking a classic example of willful blindness?
For a copy of this case, email me at email@example.com
For my mediation availability go to www.barryfisher.ca