The complainant was terminated from his employment due to an injury obtained at a second, but concurrent, employer. The respondent maintained that the complainant had a history of excessive absenteeism and was terminated for that reason.
Conciliation of this complaint was not successful, so an investigation was done. The investigation found that the respondent had demonstrated a commitment to accommodation. The respondent had accommodated the complainant for a variety of conditions over the years, and had also followed a process of education and discipline for innocent absenteeism that exceeded company standards.
Further, in this particular case, the complainant had reached the final stage of a disciplinary process and had agreed to a condition of employment where he would be terminated if absent from work. While the complainant's injury was new and unrelated to any previous accommodation, it was found that the respondent did not have a new duty to accommodate. This finding was based on the facts that the complainant had been accommodated in the past, had agreed to a strict policy regarding no more absences, and had knowingly chosen to work for a second employer in a high risk profession. It was therefore found that while the complainant was terminated from his employment based on a physical disability as defined by the Alberta Human Rights Act, it was reasonable and justifiable given the circumstances. The complain was dismissed and the file was closed.