Dr. J. Andersen

The grievor, a Youth Services Officer, was terminated for innocent absenteeism due to a chronic degenerative back condition.

He had used 310 sick days between 2009 and July 2013.

The union argued that the employer failed to accommodate his disability to the point of undue hardship by not accepting his above-average absenteeism.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the absenteeism was excessive and likely to continue.

Applying the Supreme Court's decision in Hydro-Quebec, the Board held that the duty to accommodate does not require an employer to completely alter the essence of the employment contract, which is the performance of work in exchange for remuneration.

The grievance was dismissed.