©2026 All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by North Wall Meida.
01 The phone call
Shortly before 10 a.m., a co-worker called in a concern
Zoe Stanley worked as the assistant receiver at Gerdau Long Metal North America's shredder in Whitby, Ont. The arbitrator described the role as an "air traffic controller" for the yard: directing dump trucks, crane operators and heavy equipment, by radio and in person. Nobody disputed it was safety-sensitive.
On Feb. 1, 2024, she had worked a night shift plus four hours of overtime ending at 10 a.m. Just before then, an unnamed employee phoned a facilitator in the yard. The worry: she appeared to be under the influence and was about to drive home.
The facilitator spotted her in the parking lot and asked her back to the office. Everyone in the room, including the union steward, agreed she smelled strongly of alcohol.
02 The test
She agreed to an alcohol test, not a drug test. It came back positive hours later
Stanley denied drinking on shift. She said the smell came from her work clothes, which she wore while she and her husband brewed "moonshine" in their basement. After initially resisting, she agreed to alcohol testing. Gerdau dropped its request for a drug test.
0.040
per cent, the first reading, taken at 2:12 p.m. Her shift had ended at 10 a.m.
More than four hours after her shift ended, both readings were still positive
Alcohol test results, Feb. 1, 2024, with key moments in the day
She was suspended pending investigation and driven home. Her car stayed behind. On cross-examination at the hearing, she conceded she may have been impaired when she planned to drive.
03 The story
Her account changed at almost every meeting, and the arbitrator noticed
Arbitrator Bernard Fishbein found Stanley admitted her conduct "haltingly, in steps," and only when confronted with evidence she couldn't get around.
- 1Day of the incident
The smell is from home-brewing in these clothes.
She also mentioned heavy drinking at home. The arbitrator noted it wasn't explained why that would affect her work clothes.
- 2First meeting with Gerdau
She took "a sip" (or maybe two) at her locker after her shift.
The alcohol was in her bag from a weekend visit, she said. Not credible, given the test result four hours later.
- 3Same meeting
She has a problem with alcohol but didn't know where to get help.
Her later disability claim form showed she'd used an EAP and counselling at a previous employer.
- 4Termination meeting
She would not join a "methadone clinic." Gerdau couldn't force her to take medication.
The first time Gerdau heard it, the arbitrator found. Methadone forms no part of a RAAM clinic program.
- 5At the hearing
She had stopped drinking since Feb. 1.
She later conceded she drank again around her discharge. Her doctor's April 2024 notes recorded ongoing drinking. Not true, the arbitrator found.
04 The deal
Gerdau offered a last chance. The two sides haggled over everything except the clinic
Once Stanley disclosed an alcohol problem, Gerdau said it would consider a last chance agreement. She rejected residential treatment because she had small children. Gerdau checked with its own doctor, then agreed to outpatient treatment on one condition: a Rapid Access Addiction Medicine (RAAM) clinic. It pointed her to one at Lakeridge Health.
The union drafted the first memorandum. Drafts went back and forth. The RAAM requirement sat in every version, unchallenged.
The biggest fight was over how long she'd be tested after returning
Random testing period after return to work, opening positions
What was in dispute, and what wasn't
| Term | Gerdau | Union |
|---|---|---|
| Random testing after return | 24 months, drugs and alcohol | 1 year, alcohol only |
| Updates on her treatment | Required (later offered via company nurse) | "Not reasonable" while unpaid |
| Treatment at a RAAM clinic | Required from the outset | In every draft Unchanged |
A union representative testified she had told Gerdau before the termination meeting that Stanley would not take medication. The only document backing that up was a typed summary she couldn't date. The arbitrator preferred Gerdau's account.
05 The paper trail
She was unpaid, but her disability claim stalled until after she was fired
Suspended without pay, Stanley was sent short-term disability forms. She signed her part, but didn't get her doctor's part done. She later testified the doctor wanted a fee she couldn't afford, along with gas and parking. Neither she nor the union told Gerdau, which said help was available.
By the time the form was complete, she was no longer an employee
Short-term disability claim, March to April 2024
Treatment followed the same pattern. Gerdau's HR manager called the Lakeridge clinic and was told it took walk-ins from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m., with no wait list. By the time she was fired, Stanley had gone to Lakeridge twice, though she testified it was five times. Her intake interview came on April 16, after her firing.
She did eight free, roughly 50-minute phone counselling sessions through the EAP, ending July 2, 2024. Gerdau wasn't told about them at the time.
06 The ruling
No diagnosis, no disability: The Code argument failed on the evidence
The union argued alcoholism is a disability under Ontario's Human Rights Code and Gerdau fired her before accommodation had run its course. Gerdau's own policy recognizes substance use disorder as a disability. The arbitrator agreed alcoholism can qualify, but said excessive drinking isn't the same thing.
Neither the family doctor's report nor the counsellor's explicitly diagnosed alcoholism. Both relied on what Stanley told them. The counsellor's report said she'd been sober nine months. She hadn't been.
"I am not a doctor, counsellor, let alone an addiction specialist."Arbitrator Bernard Fishbein, rejecting the union's request that he design reinstatement conditions himself
Check the file: What the arbitrator said was missing
Tap each item your own case file would contain. The meter shows how much of the gap you'd close. In this case, the meter stayed at zero.
0 of 6. This is where the union's case stood. The arbitrator couldn't say "with the requisite degree of confidence" that she was an alcoholic.
Even if she had a disability, the arbitrator said Gerdau met its duty. The employer can't accommodate what it doesn't know about, and the worker and union must do their part. Reinstating her now, he wrote, would "push accommodation past the point of undue hardship."
The union's best precedent involved a worker with more than four times her service
Years of seniority, this case vs. Hydro One Networks (2018), where a discharge for drinking at work was overturned
07 The long road
An incident from February 2024 took 18 hearing days and more than two years to decide
Hearings began Sept. 24, 2024, and ended Oct. 16, 2026. The award is dated Oct. 27, 2026. Each side filed close to a thousand pages of case law.
Hearing days were spread across 26 months
Each square is a month; filled squares mark months with hearing days (number shown)
Hearing days: 2024 — Sept. 24, Oct. 16, Nov. 20. 2025 — March 7, May 8, June 26, July 3 and 4, Nov. 14, Dec. 9 and 10. 2026 — March 17, April 16, June 11 and 16, July 15, Oct. 6 and 16. Total: 18.
08 What this means for you
Lessons depend on which side of the table you sit
- Write the rules down, train on them, keep the sign-in sheetThe union never challenged Gerdau's alcohol rules, and the worker admitted knowing them. That made cause for discipline straightforward.
- Take notes in every meetingGerdau's witnesses all had contemporaneous notes. When accounts clashed, the arbitrator preferred them over a union summary that couldn't be dated.
- Get medical advice before setting conditionsGerdau consulted its own doctor before insisting on a RAAM clinic, and put the requirement in writing in every draft.
- Make the offer concrete, and say what happens if it stallsGerdau set out specific conditions in writing, including the clinic, early remission and 24 months of testing, and warned that termination remained on the table.
- A disability claim needs medical proofReports that don't explicitly diagnose an addiction, and rest only on self-reporting, may not establish one.
- Put objections in writing, earlyThe refusal to take medication surfaced, on the arbitrator's findings, only at the termination meeting. The RAAM clause sat untouched in the union's own drafts.
- Show the workCounselling, clinic visits and money problems the employer never hears about won't count much later. Neither will a sobriety claim that turns out to be untrue.
- Remorse matters in mitigationSeven years' clean service wasn't enough without an early admission and apology.