A B.C. Human Rights Tribunal official is encouraging mediation to resolve the complaint of a nurse who alleges Fraser Health discriminated against her by not accommodating a scent sensitivity.
In a decision posted online last month denying the health authority's application to dismiss, tribunal member Amber Prince suggests Angela Brown and Fraser Health explore mediation in an attempt to avoid what Prince anticipates would be a "lengthy, complex, and difficult" hearing on the matter.
Brown filed a complaint against Fraser Health and her manager after her employment at the White Rock Home Health office was terminated in January 2017. She alleged her scent sensitivity was a physical disability, and that she had been adversely impacted by exposure to scents at work from approximately August 2014 to August 2015.
Following an unrelated leave of absence from approximately October 2015 to December 2016, Brown said Fraser Health terminated her rather than accommodate her scent sensitivity on her anticipated return to work.
Fraser Health denied the allegations and applied to dismiss the complaint.
"They say that this process cannot be a breach (of) the Code, and that there was nothing further they could do to accommodate Ms. Brown," the dismissal decision states.
Prince disagreed, noting she had no evidence or explanation before her that considering further options would have caused the health authority undue hardship.
According to background information summarized by Prince 鈥� which she notes makes no findings of fact 鈥� Brown was transferred to the White Rock office, currently located at 15476 Vine Ave., around July 2014. Prior to that, while working at the Newton location, she reported having a scent sensitivity, and provided medical supporting the claim, including diagnosis of "inhaled scents hypersensitivity syndrome" and a doctor's note of the importance of her employer enforcing its scent-free workplace policy.
The transfer to White Rock was hoped to be a better fit, "because she would have her own office with a window, and a separate exit and entryway, in contrast to the open 'pod' system at the Newton office," Prince continues.
But despite signage throughout the office reminding staff of the health authority's scent policy, Brown reported "multiple" incidents of scent exposure during her time there, including: to cologne worn by the director during a staff meeting; to an "overpowering" scent applied by a coworker for pain relief; to lingering perfume; and to scents worn by visiting technicians.
The exposures triggered symptoms ranging from nausea to migraines, the summary notes.
Additional steps taken by Fraser Health in an effort to reduce Brown's exposures included putting a scent-free sign on her office door; emailing reminders to all White Rock staff of the need to adhere to the policy, noting the impact of non-compliance on others "has been significant"; sending staff who breached the policy home to shower and change; and meeting with an exposure-prevention specialist.
Addressing Brown's exposure concerns during home visits with clients was more difficult, an affidavit excerpt in Prince's summary notes.
In preparing to return from her leave of absence, Brown took courses to assist her with scent-free work options, and advised Fraser Health that, in light of the positive impact on her health that the LOA afforded, she was "moving forward鈥� to obtain a safe and healthy work environment" and would be applying for positions in the near future.
She provided a detailed doctor's letter supporting a low-risk environment or retraining for a different location on Friday, Jan. 6, 2017. The letter 鈥� later described by Fraser Health as not containing any new medical information supporting Brown's continued leave from work 鈥� was dated Jan. 5, but wasn't shared with her superiors until after the weekend.
Brown received a letter Jan. 24 of that year, advising of her termination, effective Jan. 5. It cited a lack of correspondence to support her absence, the failure of which "is deemed employment abandonment," Prince's summary continues.
In denying Fraser Health's dismissal application, Prince said she is satisfied from the evidence before her that Brown has a reasonable prospect of proving points including that: she has a scent sensitivity and that it is a disability within the meaning of the Human Rights Code; she was exposed to scents at work and suffered adverse impacts; and that the termination was discriminatory.
