A retail worker who experienced workplace harassment in 2017 has been granted entitlement for a recurrence of a 2014 traumatic mental stress injury, along with recognition of permanent impairment and a non-economic loss determination, in a recent decision by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal.
The tribunal overturned the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board’s earlier denial, finding the worker’s psychological condition significantly deteriorated in 2017 after she encountered harassment from a male co-worker that triggered memories of a 2014 sexual assault.
Incident history
The worker began working as an overnight stocker for a large retailer in 2005. On November 4, 2014, she was sexually harassed and assaulted by a male co-worker. After this incident, the employer terminated the offending employee and moved the worker from night to day shift, which initially helped reduce her anxiety and panic attacks.
In the fall of 2017, the worker experienced several confrontations with a different male co-worker, including incidents where:
- He backed her into a corner while screaming and swearing
- He shouted in her ear so loudly it caused ear pain
- He ignored instructions to stay away from her work area
- He allegedly placed a meat hook where she might walk into it
- He made inappropriate comments after she removed the hazardous hook
The worker noted concerning similarities between the two aggressors: both were approximately 6’7″ tall (compared to her 5’1″ height), both were physically intimidating, neither took “no” for an answer, and in both cases, she had warned management about their behavior before incidents escalated.
Medical evidence
The tribunal pointed to several key medical reports supporting the worker’s case, including:
- A psychiatrist’s diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) resulting from the 2014 sexual assault that was worsened by the 2017 workplace incidents
- Her family physician’s confirmation that “the trauma that the patient experienced in 2014 had not been fully dealt with” and when “she was once again confronted by an abusive male figure, she started to reexperience the feelings/fear from her previous sexually assault”
- Medical notes indicating a 2018 PTSD screening was positive for many features related to the assault
“It is quite common that the full extent of one’s PTSD symptoms don’t present in a clinician’s office initially,” the worker’s doctor wrote. “Patients often live with symptoms and don’t disclose for many years. Further trauma compounds the feelings and worsen the PTSD symptoms, it is at that point patients seek medical attention.”
Policy considerations
The tribunal applied the WSIB’s recurrence policy, which states a worker may be entitled to benefits for a recurrence if they experience a significant deterioration that does not result from a significant new incident and is clinically compatible with the original injury.
The tribunal found all three required elements for a recurrence:
- The worker experienced a significant deterioration in her psychological condition, requiring active clinical treatment and time off work
- The 2017 incidents were not considered a “significant new incident” as defined in policy
- The condition was clinically compatible with the original injury, with a clear causal link established by medical evidence
“We find that the incidents in 2017 were of less consequence or importance, and would not have triggered a deterioration in the worker’s psychological functioning were it not for the ongoing effects of the November 2014 assault,” the tribunal wrote.
Gap in medical documentation
The board had denied ongoing benefits beyond January 2015, citing a lack of medical continuity between the 2014 assault and the 2017 incidents.
The tribunal acknowledged this gap but noted the recurrence policy doesn’t require continuous symptoms to establish a causal link. The panel accepted the doctor’s explanation that PTSD symptoms are often not fully disclosed initially and can be reactivated by similar triggers later.
Outcome
The tribunal determined that the worker has a permanent psychological impairment related to PTSD and is entitled to a non-economic loss determination. The case was returned to the WSIB to determine the maximum medical recovery date and any additional benefits.
For more information, see Decision No. 1467/24, 2025 ONWSIAT 233 (CanLII).
