Walter Rilkoff V.

This was the third day of the hearing. The formality of the Human Rights Tribunal was not as strictly followed as observed in the Supreme Court. Judge Walter Rilkoff walked into the room and exchanged good mornings with Mr. Darcy Adair (self-represented) and the defence lawyer Mr. Mazhari and promptly went straight into record. The plaintiff and the deffent team did not have to rise. Judge Rilkoff did notice my presence and gave me a smile and a nod.

Mr. Darcy Adair was an employee for 13 years at Forensic Psychiatric Institute of BC. He worked as a Forensic Security Officer. The case is about his return to his employment after leaving his position for disability for a year in 2014. Mr. Adair was seeking proper accommodation so he could be treated equally in terms of job status and earnings just before he left the position in 2014.

By proper accommodation, Mr. Adair meant getting his day-time position back instead of working in the evening and night shifts. As a constable at the Institute, a forensic security officer’s duties involve providing safe escorts for all maximum security persons in custody to their medical appointments via a designated vehicle in the day time and performing security duties at the Institute. Due to his disability, Mr. Adair had his Class-4

Adair’s union to withdraw from demanding a day time position as a forensic security officer. The employer has shown good will and adequate accommodation to keep Mr. Adair’s position. The employer had the option of dismissing Mr. Adair but did not. So I would suggest to Mr. Adair to withdraw from the case. As for the defanding councel, I see to issues that they would win the case. They could argue having the class-4 driver’s license as a bona fide occupational requirement. They could also use the point that Mr. Adair breached the master schedule in the collective agreement which sets a one-year priior scheduling for forensic security officers at the