|Published on April 03, 2012||Stringer LLP Admin|
The law in Canada regarding random drug and alcohol testing has been inconsistent for some time, with the Alberta and Ontario Courts of Appeal taking divergent paths.
In Ontario, the Court of Appeal has held that employers may conduct random alcohol testing for employees in safety sensitive positions, provided it is a bone fide occupational requirement. However, the Court of Appeal found that a random drug testing policy violated the Ontario Human Rights Code as it could not measure on-the-job impairment but only past drug use (See Entrop v Imperial Oil (2000), CanLII 16800 (ONCA)).
This is in contrast to the Alberta Court of Appeal’s decision in Kellogg Brown where a pre-employment drug testing policy was found to by a bone fide occupational requirement. The Alberta Court of Appeal relied on the fact that cannabis can sometimes linger in the body for several days. As such, even recreational use outside of the workplace could have an effect on the workplace (Chaisson v Kellogg Brown & Root (Canada) Co (2008), 289 D.L.R. (4th) 95 (Kellogg Brown).
Whether an employer can require employees to submit to a drug test seems to depend on the province where they reside. Eventually the Supreme Court will have to decide this issue.
The Supreme Court recently granted leave to appeal a decision regarding a random alcohol testing policy out of a paper mill near the City of Saint John in New Brunswick. The employer, Irving Pulp & Paper, implemented a workplace safety policy in 2006 that included random alcohol testing for employees in safety sensitive positions (click here to see the New Brunswick Court of Appeal decision). Although this case deals only with alcohol testing, the Supreme Court’s decision may shine a light on the path adjudicators should follow when considering random drug testing as well.
- AODA Compliance Deadlines for January 2014 are Quickly Approaching
- Ministry of Labour Announces New Training Requirements
- SCC Protects Union Rights to Strike-Related Activity over Public Privacy Legislation
- Two Kicks at the Can: Worker Allowed to Re-litigate WSIB Accommodation Dispute at the Human Rights Tribunal
- Ontario Ministry of Labour announces safety blitz on recycling and waste hazards
- Review Court Bars Wrongful Dismissal Claim Post-ESA Claim
- Contractors Must Ensure Worker Safety at Customer Work Sites
- Register Now for our Complimentary Quarterly HR-Law Webinar - Q3
- Ontario Ministry of Labour blitz of the retail industry – Are you ESA compliant?
- “Holding” Means What It Says: Court of Appeal Rejects Narrow Interpretation of Ban on Holding Cell Phones While Driving
- Failure to Mitigate proves Costly to Plaintiff in Constructive Dismissal
- Ontario Human Rights Tribunal Opening the Door to Duplicative Litigation?
- Confidentiality Clause has Teeth: Police Officer forced to Return Settlement Funds
- MOL Prosecution Continues Amidst CCAA Proceedings
- Summary Judgement Not Always Appropriate in Wrongful Dismissal Actions
- Register Now for our 27th Annual Employers' Conference, Labour & Employment Law Update 2013
- Solid evidentiary burden to prove constructive dismissal due to poisoned work environment
- Can an Arbitrator Award Damages Against an Employer for Making False Statements to the WSIB?
- Save the Date! Don't Miss our Annual Employers' Conference
- Upcoming AODA Obligations – Are you ready?
- “Rocket Docket” to Summary Judgment in “Without Cause” Wrongful Dismissal Cases
- Appeal Court Finds Compensation for Loss During Notice Period Trumps Shareholders’ Agreement
- ONCA Confirms NO Fault-Based Workers' Compensation Grievances
- When is a Laid off Employee Still an Employee? When he Signs a Construction Union Membership Card
- Announcing our Complimentary Quarterly HR-Law Webinar (Q2)
- Court Holds That Smell of Marijuana in a Vehicle Does Not Justify Drug Testing Under OH&S Legislation
- What you Need to Know About the New Voluntary Workplace Mental Health Standard
- Human Rights Tribunal Finds Discrimination in Request for Medical Information
- What does “Disability” Actually Mean for Accommodation Purposes?
- Court of Appeal Case Shows Risks of Gaps in WSIB Coverage of Executives
- Specific Termination Provision Upheld After Sale of Business
- Discipline Warranted for Work Refusal Complaint Not Made in Good Faith
- Dealing effectively with OHS inspectors
- AODA compliance: Benefits of Being Ahead of the Game
- Responding to human rights harassment complaints: Guidelines from the HRTO
- How NOT to Draft an Enforceable Non-Competition Agreement
- So Your AODA Customer Service Standard Report is Past Due?
- Announcing our Complimentary Quarterly Roundup Webinar
- New Developments in Immigration Law for Skilled Trades
- New Employment Contract Term Triggers Constructive Dismissal
- Registration Now Open - Managing the Employment Lifecycle Webinar Series
- Where WSIB Benefits Denied Civil Claim May Proceed
- Alberta Human Rights Tribunal Awards Five Years of Back Pay and Reinstatement
- Stringer LLP Obtains $100K Retroactive NEER Adjustment in WSIAT Appeal
- Ontario Court of Appeal Overturns Blue Mountain Accident Reporting Decision
- Make Sure Pre-Employment Screening is Complete Before they Start
- Split Hairs and Sector Disputes
- Early Bird Registration is now open for First Reference's Ontario Employment Law Conference
- Early Morning OLRB Ruling Finds Teachers' Planned Day of Protest an Illegal Strike
- Court of Appeal Protects Manager from Personal Liability on Employee Termination
- accessibility for ontarians with disabilities act
- accessibility policies
- class actions
- constitutional law
- construction labour relations
- constructive dismissal
- disability benefits
- employment insurance
- employment law
- employment standards
- employment standards act
- fiduciary duties
- first nations
- general litigation
- human rights
- integrated accessibility standard
- labour law
- labour relations
- ministry of labour
- occupational health and safety
- restrictive covenants
- retail blitz
- section 45.1
- stringer llp announcements
- workers' compensation
- wrongful dismissal litigation