The Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) has issued a mixed ruling in a case involving Walmart Canada and one of its former workers.
The Tribunal barred his claims related to an unsafe work environment, but said the worker’s wrongful dismissal claim can proceed.
Ruling specifics
Walmart had sought an order under section 31 of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 (WSIA), to bar the worker’s civil action against them on the grounds that it was removed by the WSIA. The Tribunal, however, found that while some aspects of the claim were indeed barred by the Act, his wrongful dismissal claim could continue.
Background of the case
F.T. began working for Walmart as a full-time In-Store Loss Prevention Associate in 2009, primarily focusing on preventing theft. By 2017, F.T. started experiencing respiratory difficulties, which he attributed to mould exposure in his workplace office. Initially, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) denied his claim, but later accepted it in January 2019, granting him healthcare and loss of earnings benefits for a brief period in December 2017. The WSIB concluded that his work-related injury resolved without permanent impairment by May 2018.
In November 2019, F.T. left Walmart after the company informed him he could not continue working part-time in his current role. He declined an alternative part-time position as a floor-walker and subsequently filed a mental stress claim with the WSIB, which was denied in May 2021.
Court proceedings
F.T. filed a civil action against Walmart in November 2021, alleging constructive wrongful dismissal due to the company’s failure to provide a safe work environment. He claimed severe illness from mould exposure and sought $500,000 in general damages, $200,000 for personal injury, and additional damages for punitive and moral reasons.
Walmart, a Schedule 1 employer under the WSIA, argued that the civil action was essentially a tort claim disguised as a wrongful dismissal suit and should be barred by the Act. They contended that the WSIA’s provisions, which prevent workers from suing their employers for workplace injuries, applied to this case.
Tribunal’s analysis and decision
The Tribunal’s analysis centred on sections 26 and 28 of the WSIA, which prohibit civil actions for personal injuries sustained during employment. “As a general rule, the WSIA will not prevent a bona fide action for wrongful dismissal from proceeding before the courts,” noted the Tribunal. It emphasized examining the substance of a claim rather than its framing.
In this case, the Tribunal determined that F.T.’s claim was twofold: it included a disguised tort action for workplace injuries and a bona fide wrongful dismissal claim. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled:
- Claims for $200,000 in damages due to Wal-Mart’s failure to provide a safe work environment, and any associated punitive, aggravated, or moral damages, were barred by sections 26 and 28 of the WSIA.
- The wrongful dismissal claim, including associated damages for Wal-Mart’s alleged failure to provide required accommodations and an unsafe working environment, could proceed. However, this claim could not be used to determine the work-relatedness of F.T.’s injuries, a matter under WSIB’s exclusive jurisdiction.
Impact of the ruling
This decision clarifies that while workers cannot sue for workplace injuries if covered by WSIA, they may still pursue claims for wrongful dismissal if an employer fails to meet contractual obligations or provide a safe work environment. As stated by the Tribunal, “A worker who decides to leave a workplace because it is unsafe, is not prohibited from maintaining an action for constructive wrongful dismissal on those grounds.”
F.T.’s case will now return to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, where the wrongful dismissal claim will be adjudicated.
For more information, see Decision No. 162/24, 2024 ONWSIAT 814 (CanLII).
