Case in question
Taylor highlighted a 2010 Federal Court of Canada case, in which the court had to consider whether the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) had erred in declining to deal with one Quebec employee’s complaint.
Employee François Dupuis claimed he had been discriminated against because his employers at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) should have refused his resignation when it was offered.
Dupuis said he was experiencing a mental disorder at the time and bosses should have declined, directing him to seek medical attention instead.
The court held that it was unreasonable for the CHRC to refuse to deal with the complaint and said the DFAIT should have known something was wrong because consultant Dupuis had recently purchased a house and was being considered for a permanent role.
The court said Dupuis’ resignation was clearly "irrational" and warranted further inquiry.
“Cases like [Dupuis v. Canada 2010 FC 511]
illustrate the challenges faced by employers with employees who have undisclosed mental health issues,” says Taylor. “Most employers would prefer to respect the privacy and autonomy of their employees and refrain from prying into what is obviously a very personal sphere.”
To read Kristin Taylor’s full article, click here
More like this:
Financial services powerhouse’s flex work policy makes waves
Should all employees be encouraged to chase leadership?
Unpleasant execs poisoning the workforce