Call Us Now
Email Us Now
In a recent case highlighting the serious risks employers face when they fail to comply with reinstatement orders, Canadian Pacific Kansas City Railway (CPKC) was ordered to pay $20,000 in damages to a conductor after delaying his return to work for over two years and imposing unnecessary barriers.
The dispute stemmed from CPKC’s termination of the employee, W.C., following an anonymous tip about alleged marijuana use. Despite a December 2022 decision that found the termination was without reasonable grounds and ordered W.C.’s full reinstatement with compensation, CPKC refused to allow him back unless he completed a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) assessment — a condition not required by the arbitration decision.
The arbitrator found CPKC’s conduct discriminatory and ruled that the SAP requirement created an unreasonable and unauthorized barrier to reinstatement. This delay not only denied W.C. his job but also cut him off from essential health and financial benefits, exacerbating his major depressive disorder.
Key findings of the decision included:
- CPKC had no legal basis to withhold 40% of W.C.’s back pay.
- The SAP requirement was deemed an unjustified obstacle to reinstatement, especially after W.C. passed a substance test and presented medical evidence confirming he had no substance abuse issues.
- The employer’s actions were discriminatory under the Canadian Human Rights Act because W.C.’s disabilities — including his depression — were a factor in their decision not to reinstate him.
As a result, the arbitrator awarded W.C. $10,000 for pain and suffering and $10,000 in special compensation, citing the employer’s reckless disregard for his rights and the significant harm caused. The arbitrator also ordered CPKC to reinstate W.C. “on paper,” restore his lost benefits, and begin a duty to accommodate process if required.
Lessons for Employers
This case is a crucial reminder for employers: ignoring reinstatement orders or imposing additional conditions can lead to significant financial, legal, and reputational consequences. Employers must act promptly and in good faith when an order to reinstate an employee is issued. Adding unauthorized barriers — especially those that discriminate against protected characteristics like disability — will not only attract damages but also trigger human rights complaints.
Employers should also remember that accommodation is a legal duty under human rights law. Conditions related to fitness for duty must be evidence-based and consistent with legal obligations, not imposed arbitrarily.
If you are an employee facing barriers to reinstatement or an employer seeking guidance on compliance with reinstatement or accommodation obligations, our experienced employment, labour, and human rights lawyers can help. Contact Labour Rights Law today for a consultation to protect your rights and obligations.
To book a consultation, please give us a call toll-free 1 (877) 708-8350 or locally 604-245-3169. You can also book a consultation online here.
