The message of these and other similar decisions seems to be that employers considering dismissal because of a breach by a worker of a last-chance agreement requiring the worker to maintain a certain level of presence should be careful not to rely on absences because of interference with human rights. If the alleged absence is due to a disability, the employer must be prepared to prove that it has housed the worker until unwarranted hardness. Innocent absenteeism is one of the most sensitive issues facing management. Beyond the difficulties associated with developing a reasonable and reparable approach to arbitration, employers must also consider the impact of human rights law when developing programs to control innocent absences. This raises the question of whether the existence of a last-chance agreement is in itself a form of housing sufficient to meet the employer`s human rights obligations. While the case law may indicate that these agreements constitute a form of accommodation, the likely answer is that the employer must prove that more than just extended a last chance for the worker before dismissal. The Adjudicator found that the agreements were not discriminatory and that the grief had been accommodated to an undue harshness. She found that the company had hosted the bereaved in a number of ways, such as facilitation. B of his participation in a home care program and the rescheduling of his leave period. In addition, the employer had only entered into the series of agreements after a long period of temporary absence.

As a result, the arbitrator found that the company could not reasonably be expected to mourn more. Finally, the ACF must provide for a period during which the worker must meet his conditions; and indeterminate aces will not meet the adequacy verification in light of a legal challenge. ONE- or two-year LCAs are common. In particular, the period of setting up an ACA may exclude the period during which the worker is not absent from work while on leave. At Kingston General Hospital v. O.N.A., 2010 CarswellOnt 4066, the employer extended the life of the ACA due to the annual absence of the worker on maternity leave to provide the employer with an appropriate opportunity to assess compliance with the provisions of the ABI. In this case, the union accepted the extension and the arbitrator did not intervene in the agreement. It is clear that an employer`s efforts to deal with innocent absenteeism must be consistent with human rights laws. This requirement is particularly acute when a decision has been made to dismiss a staff member because of an innocent absence. In this regard, it is important to bear in mind that innocent absences can take two forms: one of which is due to a condition that is a «disability» under human rights legislation and the other that does not exist.