A human rights complaint against two Walmart Canada employees has been dismissed, although the broader case against the corporation itself will proceed, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has ruled.
This case stems from an incident in December 2020 involving E.G., who alleged discrimination based on disability at a Walmart store in B.C. during the COVID-19 pandemic.
E.G., who claims a disability prevents her from wearing face masks, reported that she was not wearing a mask while shopping, as per her medical exemption. Despite this, she was approached by an assistant store manager and instructed to wear a mask or face shield, or leave the store. The tribunal document outlines that G.H. felt discriminated against when she was denied service after informing the staff of her condition.
The following day, G.H. contacted the store manager to express her grievances. The conversation escalated, with the manager allegedly stating that medical exemptions needed verification by police or bylaw officers, and warned G.H. against returning to the store without such verification.
Walmart defended the actions of its employees, suggesting that the measures were in compliance with their policies which were designed to accommodate medical and religious mask exemptions without requiring proof. The company submitted that continuing the complaint against the two individual employees would not serve the public interest, as outlined in section 27(1)(d)(ii) of the Human Rights Code, which allows for dismissal if it does not advance the Code’s purposes.
The Tribunal agreed with Walmart, citing several reasons for dismissing the complaint against the individuals while allowing the case against Walmart to continue. It acknowledged that while there might be individual culpability, the conduct of the employees fell within their professional duties and was not of a nature that necessitated individual liability.
“The remedial aims of the Code may be most fairly and efficiently fulfilled without holding individuals liable,” the ruling stated.
It also recommended that the parties consider mediation to resolve the remaining issues.
For more information, see Goulet-Hillier v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. and others, 2024 BCHRT 103 (CanLII).
