Case Summary: Bell Canada 2025 (Dismissal of employee on disability leave upheld)
This case involves Jean-Smarth Brutus, a unionized night watch assistant at Bell Canada, who was dismissed while on disability leave. Bell Canada terminated Brutus’s employment because he repeatedly failed to respond to requests to either return to work or provide additional medical information to justify his continued absence.
Key Facts:
Brutus had been on disability since May 11, 2020, citing stress related to COVID-19 and psychological problems.
Manulife (Bell Canada’s disability insurer) repeatedly requested documentation from Brutus to justify his disability claim, including a mental health questionnaire.
Brutus was uncooperative with Manulife, rarely responding to emails or calls, and failing to provide requested medical information.
His disability benefits were suspended twice due to lack of cooperation and insufficient medical documentation.
Bell Canada attempted multiple times to contact Brutus to discuss his return to work or accommodations.
The employer sent three formal summonses requesting Brutus to report to work or provide proper medical documentation to support continued absence.
Brutus ignored all three summonses and failed to respond to the employer's attempts to contact him.
Surveillance videos revealed Brutus was working at his restaurant while claiming disability.
Bell Canada terminated his employment on November 12, 2020.
Union's Position:
The employer failed to accommodate Brutus's disability.
The dismissal was disciplinary or mixed in nature rather than administrative.
Brutus was not at fault as the employer already had sufficient medical information to justify the disability leave.
Employer's Position:
The dismissal was administrative due to Brutus's inability or unwillingness to cooperate.
Brutus failed to provide essential medical information needed to assess possible accommodations.
The employer made reasonable attempts to accommodate Brutus but couldn't do so without his cooperation.
Arbitrator's Decision
The arbitrator determined that the dismissal was administrative in nature, not disciplinary, and ruled that:
· the surveillance evidence was admissible, as the employer had reasonable grounds for conducting surveillance.
· Brutus failed in his duty to cooperate with the employer's reasonable requests.
· His refusal to respond to calls, emails, and summonses prevented any accommodation process.
· The employer acted reasonably and did not discriminate based on disability.
· Brutus "buried his head in the sand" and was "the architect of his own misfortune."
Brutus’s grievance was denied, and Bell Canada's dismissal of Jean-Smarth Brutus was upheld.
Key Takeaways
1. Disability Leave Management is a long process.
2. Employers are well advised to exercise concern for the absent employee, patience, and a disciplined information-gathering process.
3. Employees have a duty to participate in the process, provided that the employer’s requests are reasonable.
4. An employee on disability leave can be dismissed for failure to comply with the employer’s reasonable information requirements.
The arbitrator specifically noted that this persistent lack of response was a key factor in the decision, stating that Brutus "stubbornly persisted in his dumbness" and "buried his head in the sand," becoming "the architect of his own misfortune."