Workplace Law Blog
Knowledge Centre

Mandatory vaccination policy found to be reasonable

April 21, 2022

In a March 17 arbitration award, yet another Ontario arbitrator found a mandatory vaccination policy to be reasonable. In Unifor Local 973 and Coca-Cola Canada Bolling Limited the arbitrator reviewed the significant impact that COVID-19 had had on the workplace including the death of two employees and 13% of employees testing positive for COVID-19 in the month of January 2022 alone. The spread of the disease had resulted in two of the facilities being fully closed and two partially closed for periods of time.  The rate of hospitalization of company employees had increased six fold from 2020 – 2021. In response to the pandemic, the Company instituted a nation wide COVID-19 vaccination policy which required employees to be fully vaccinated with two doses of an approved vaccine by January 1, 2022, or face workplace consequences which might include disciplinary consequences including termination. The policy provided accommodation consistent with the requirements of human rights legislation and was scheduled for review on April 1, 2022.

In finding that the mandatory vaccination policy established a reasonable balance between an employee’s interest to privacy and bodily integrity and the employer’s interest in maintaining the health and safety of the workplace, the arbitrator reviewed the general context in which the policy was enacted, noting:

“…The Policy is a response to a global health pandemic that has so far claimed 6 million lives worldwide. It makes mandatory the use of vaccines, that have proven to be safe and effective at combatting not only the transmission of the virus, but also at providing significantly greater protection from serious illness, hospitalization, and death for those individuals who are fully vaccinated. There is no question that it is extraordinary for an employer to enact a workplace rule or policy that impacts an employee’s right to privacy and bodily integrity, but there can be no dispute that the global COVID-19 pandemic is an extraordinary health challenge. Not only are employers obliged to ensure that the health and safety of an employee is always protected, under s. 25(2)(h) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, employers are statutorily required to ‘take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker’.”

The factors specific to the workplace considered by the arbitrator included that the employees must attend the workplace to do their job, most were working in close quarters, most of the customers have their own vaccination policies and COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the Company. In addition the Company had a variety of other protocols in place to reduce the threat posed by COVID 19 and despite these measures the disease was continuing to spread at an alarming rate at the Company. The Arbitrator provided for a period to at least April 4, 2022 to allow non compliant employees to become compliant with the policy prior to facing disciplinary measures.

This decision is consistent with the decisions that preceded it. With the now changing face of the pandemic, and what appears to be a move to an endemic, it will be interesting to watch how arbitrators and our courts balance the interests of individuals to privacy and bodily integrity with the employer’s requirement to maintain the health and safety of the workplace.

Still have questions about vaccination policies? Contact Rose Keith, QC at [email protected] or anyone else from our team listed on the Authors page.

Tags

Expertise

Important Notice: The information contained in this Article is intended for general information purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. It is not intended as legal advice from Harper Grey LLP or the individual author(s), nor intended as a substitute for legal advice on any specific subject matter. Detailed legal counsel should be sought prior to undertaking any legal matter. The information contained in this Article is current to the last update and may change. Last Update: April 21, 2022.

©Harper Grey LLP 2022

 

Related

Recent changes to BC’s Residential Tenancy Act
Recent changes to BC’s Residential Tenancy Act Recent changes to BC’s Residential Tenancy Act Recent changes to BC’s Residential Tenancy Act
Norm Streu co-authors article for Construction Business magazine
Norm Streu co-authors article for Construction Business magazine Norm Streu co-authors article for Construction Business magazine
New benchmark for damages for injury to dignity for sexual harassment
New benchmark for damages for injury to dignity for sexual harassment New benchmark for damages for injury to dignity for sexual harassment
Damages Awarded Under Intimate Images Act
Damages Awarded Under Intimate Images Act Damages Awarded Under Intimate Images Act
Retail Case Update: The Court’s View on Post-Accident Remedial Measures – Are They Determinative of Liability?
Retail Case Update: The Court’s View on Post-Accident Remedial Measures – Are They Determinative of Liability? Retail Case Update: The Court’s View on Post-Accident Remedial Measures – Are They Determinative of Liability? Retail Case Update: The Court’s View on Post-Accident Remedial Measures – Are They Determinative of Liability?
The Dangers of Two Step Offers
The Dangers of Two Step Offers The Dangers of Two Step Offers
Court says federal political parties are subject to BC privacy legislation
Court says federal political parties are subject to BC privacy legislation Court says federal political parties are subject to BC privacy legislation
Court Grants Interim Injunction to Restrain Employees from Competing with their Former Employer
Court Grants Interim Injunction to Restrain Employees from Competing with their Former Employer Court Grants Interim Injunction to Restrain Employees from Competing with their Former Employer
Harper Grey Lawyers complete Mental Health First Aid Certification
Harper Grey Lawyers complete Mental Health First Aid Certification
Defining the Scope of the Cost Recovery Action Under BC’s Environmental Management Act
Defining the Scope of the Cost Recovery Action Under BC’s Environmental Management Act Defining the Scope of the Cost Recovery Action Under BC’s Environmental Management Act Defining the Scope of the Cost Recovery Action Under BC’s Environmental Management Act
Roshni Veerapen elected as Vice Chair of the Health Law Section
Roshni Veerapen elected as Vice Chair of the Health Law Section Roshni Veerapen elected as Vice Chair of the Health Law Section
Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion
Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion
National Indigenous History Month
National Indigenous History Month
Emilie LeDuc appointed to the British Columbia Law Institute Board of Directors
Emilie LeDuc appointed to the British Columbia Law Institute Board of Directors Emilie LeDuc appointed to the British Columbia Law Institute Board of Directors
William Clark and Kara Hill present at the 2024 Self Governing Professions CLE
William Clark and Kara Hill present at the 2024 Self Governing Professions CLE William Clark and Kara Hill present at the 2024 Self Governing Professions CLE William Clark and Kara Hill present at the 2024 Self Governing Professions CLE
arrow icon

Subscribe