- 注册
- 2002-10-07
- 消息
- 402,235
- 荣誉分数
- 76
- 声望点数
- 0
The Federal Court of Appeal has overturned a 2015 decision that gave long-time Ottawa public servant Gisele Gatièn the right to pursue damages for mental suffering from the federal government.
Gatièn, a manager with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, sought $100,000 for mental suffering and loss of professional standing after her employer suspended her for 10 days in 2011 for her handling of a troublesome employee who had been removed from the workplace after assaulting Gatièn.
Stressed by the employee’s after-hours return to the office to collect her belongings, Gatien used filing cabinets and cardboard boxes to erect a barricade in the workplace, papering it with arrows pointing the way to the employee’s work station.
Gatièn was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder in 2013, with her doctor blaming her employer’s “refusal to recognize the harm that was done to her” by the troublesome employee as the major source of her problem. After a lengthy period on sick leave, she retired in 2014, ending her 35-year career on a sour note.
A tribunal of the Public Service Labour Relations Board later ruled that the penalty imposed on Gatièn was excessive, but denied her request for $100,000 in damages.
In a decision last April, Federal Court Justice John O’Keefe said the labour relations board misunderstood the legal test for awarding mental suffering damages and failed to consider key evidence. He referred the matter back to the tribunal for redetermination.
At the time, Paul Champ, Gatièn’s lawyer, said the judgment set a precedent for public servants “who feel they have been disciplined in bad faith and made a scapegoat for the mistakes of senior managers.”
But in a decision dated Jan. 6, the Federal Court of Appeal found it was O’Keefe who erred, both in his finding that the tribunal misapplied the principles applicable to awards of aggravated damages and in his conclusion that it failed to consider evidence that Gatièn’s employer was unaware of her mental health condition when it imposed discipline.
“The mere fact that she dissolved into tears or said she was stressed falls well short of proof of her suffering from a recognized psychiatric illness,” the appeal court said.
The matter of when damages may be awarded for an employer’s bad faith conduct “falls within the specialized expertise of labour adjudicators,” the court said. In this case, the tribunal’s decision was reasonable and should not have been overturned, it found.
dbutler@postmedia.com
twitter.com/ButlerDon
查看原文...
Gatièn, a manager with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, sought $100,000 for mental suffering and loss of professional standing after her employer suspended her for 10 days in 2011 for her handling of a troublesome employee who had been removed from the workplace after assaulting Gatièn.
Stressed by the employee’s after-hours return to the office to collect her belongings, Gatien used filing cabinets and cardboard boxes to erect a barricade in the workplace, papering it with arrows pointing the way to the employee’s work station.
Gatièn was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder in 2013, with her doctor blaming her employer’s “refusal to recognize the harm that was done to her” by the troublesome employee as the major source of her problem. After a lengthy period on sick leave, she retired in 2014, ending her 35-year career on a sour note.
A tribunal of the Public Service Labour Relations Board later ruled that the penalty imposed on Gatièn was excessive, but denied her request for $100,000 in damages.
In a decision last April, Federal Court Justice John O’Keefe said the labour relations board misunderstood the legal test for awarding mental suffering damages and failed to consider key evidence. He referred the matter back to the tribunal for redetermination.
At the time, Paul Champ, Gatièn’s lawyer, said the judgment set a precedent for public servants “who feel they have been disciplined in bad faith and made a scapegoat for the mistakes of senior managers.”
But in a decision dated Jan. 6, the Federal Court of Appeal found it was O’Keefe who erred, both in his finding that the tribunal misapplied the principles applicable to awards of aggravated damages and in his conclusion that it failed to consider evidence that Gatièn’s employer was unaware of her mental health condition when it imposed discipline.
“The mere fact that she dissolved into tears or said she was stressed falls well short of proof of her suffering from a recognized psychiatric illness,” the appeal court said.
The matter of when damages may be awarded for an employer’s bad faith conduct “falls within the specialized expertise of labour adjudicators,” the court said. In this case, the tribunal’s decision was reasonable and should not have been overturned, it found.
dbutler@postmedia.com
twitter.com/ButlerDon
查看原文...
