Ontario Workplace Disability Accommodation

When Refusing Accommodation Leads to Termination: What Employees and Employers Need to Know

Workplace accommodation is one of the most misunderstood areas of employment law. While employers have a legal duty to accommodate employees with disabilities, that duty is not unlimited, nor does it exist in a vacuum. Employees also have responsibilities. In other words, workplace accommodation is a two-way road. When those responsibilities are ignored, even long-term employment can come to an end.

A employment law decision involving an employer highlights an important reality: an employee who refuses to cooperate in the accommodation process, including refusing a reasonable independent medical examination (IME), may lawfully be terminated for cause.

This case offers valuable guidance for employees, employers, HR professionals, and anyone seeking advice from a Toronto employment lawyer, wrongful dismissal lawyer, or employment contract lawyer.

Background of the Case

The employee, Mr. Wan, began working as a cable technician in 2007. Over the years, he experienced multiple workplace injuries involving his ankle. After an initial injury in 2013, he suffered a second incident in 2014 and later underwent functional abilities testing in 2015.

In 2016, following a re-injury, the employer reassigned him to a warehouse assistant role as a form of accommodation. This demonstrated the employer’s willingness to adjust duties to align with medical limitations.

Several years later, questions arose about whether the existing medical information was still accurate.

Why Updated Medical Information Matters

By 2018, the employer requested updated medical details from the employee’s treating physician. Specifically, they sought:

• Clarification on current restrictions

• An estimate of how long those restrictions would last

• A long-term outlook for recovery

The physician recommended that the employee take frequent breaks—five minutes for every twenty minutes worked—for the next five years. However, this recommendation was not based on a new assessment. Instead, it relied on functional testing that was already several years old.

From an employment law perspective, this raised legitimate concerns. Employers are legally required to ensure that employees can perform their duties safely, not only for their own well-being but also for coworkers and the workplace as a whole.

To meet that obligation, the employer requested an independent medical examination (IME) to obtain current, objective medical information.

The Refusal That Changed Everything

The employee refused to attend the IME. His position was that the employer already had enough medical information and had no right to ask for more. Despite repeated requests, he continued to decline.

Eventually, the employer terminated his employment for cause, citing his ongoing refusal to cooperate in the accommodation process.

The employee challenged the termination, claiming:

• Discrimination based on disability

• Unjust dismissal under federal employment legislation

• A violation of human rights protections

He sought reinstatement, back pay, and damages.

The Legal Issues Considered

The adjudicator was required to answer two central questions:

1. Did the employer have just cause to terminate the employee for refusing to attend the IME?

2. If so, should termination be replaced with a lesser penalty, such as suspension or reinstatement?

These are the same questions frequently analyzed by a wrongful dismissal lawyer or severance package lawyer in Toronto when assessing termination risk.

The Decision: Termination Upheld

The adjudicator ruled in favour of the employer.

While there was no dispute that the employee had a disability, the adjudicator found that the employee failed to meet his own legal obligations. Specifically, he did not cooperate in good faith with reasonable efforts to determine an appropriate accommodation.

Key findings included:

• Accommodation is a shared process, not a unilateral decision by the employee

• The employer was entitled to request updated medical information

• The employee’s refusal was unjustified and persistent

• The breakdown of the employment relationship was caused by the employee’s conduct

As a result, the employee could not establish discrimination under human rights legislation, and the termination for cause was upheld.

Important Principles from the Ruling

This case reinforces several well-established employment law principles that are frequently relied on by Toronto employment lawyers:

1. The Employee Bears the Initial Burden

To succeed in a discrimination claim, the employee must first prove a prima facie case. Refusing to participate in accommodation undermines that claim.

2. Accommodation Requires Cooperation

Employers, employees, and unions (where applicable) must work together. When one party refuses to engage, the process collapses.

3. Employers Can Request Medical Information

While medical details are private, employees must provide enough information to allow the employer to understand restrictions, limitations, and safety concerns.

4. Independent Medical Exams Can Be a Reasonable Request by an Employer

When existing medical information is outdated, inconsistent, or insufficient, requesting an IME may be entirely appropriate.

5. Refusal Can Lead to Just Cause Termination

If an employee unreasonably refuses to provide medical information or attend an IME, the employer’s duty to accommodate may come to an end.

Why the Doctor’s Note Was Not Enough

One key issue was that the employee’s doctor never assessed how the employee’s limitations aligned with the actual requirements of the job. Instead, the recommendations were based on older testing and did not address workplace realities.

Employers are not required to blindly accept medical opinions that lack context or relevance. They are entitled to seek clarification—especially when long-term or permanent accommodation is being requested.

Lessons for Employees

Employees seeking accommodation should understand:

• Accommodation is not something an employee is legally able to dictate on their own

• Providing incomplete or outdated medical information may impact an employee’s job

• Refusing reasonable requests may weaken any future wrongful dismissal claim against an employer

If you are unsure about your rights, consulting an employment contract lawyer or wrongful dismissal lawyer before refusing an employer’s request can prevent serious consequences.

Call Toronto Employment Lawyer Now

It is important for an employee (or an employee) to obtain a legal consultation before taking any action that could affect their situation at workplace. Sezar has experience advocating for both employers and employees, which allows him to anticipate the other side’s arguments and develop an effective strategy, including termination of employment.

If you are looking for a wrongful dismissal lawyer in Toronto, call us today at 647-822-5492 for a case evaluation with an experienced employment lawyer.

Disclaimer: The content on this website and blog is not legal advice or legal opinion of any kind, and is only to provide general information. It is in no way particular to your individual case and should not be relied upon in any way. The outcome of a legal matter depends on its unique circumstances, and prior successes are not indicative of future results. No portion or use of this website or blog will establish a lawyer-client relationship with the author, this law firm or any related party. Should you require legal advice for your particular situation, please fill out the form below, or call 647-822-5492, to request an initial consultation.