The Fédération interprofessionnelle de la santé du Québec (FIQ) has won its case for some of its home support members who were victims of threats, verbal and physical assaults and racist remarks from a client, for almost four years.
The Administrative Labour Tribunal agrees with the Interprofessional Health Federation and declares that the CIUSSS of North Montreal Island has deviated from certain obligations under the Act respecting occupational health and safety, by not taking the necessary measures to protect these workers, better inform them and better train them.
He gave him six months to rectify the situation.
The user in question, now deceased, was being treated by a psychiatrist and suffered from a severe personality disorder, marked by antisocial traits, marked impulsivity and intense anger, the Court reports in its decision.
She insulted the nurses who came to care for her at home, calling them “fat cow,” “asshole,” “fat cunt,” telling them to “shut their mouths,” and specifically targeting nurses of color. She obstructed care and services, kicked furniture, threw a pitcher of water at one worker, and punched another in the arm.
“The consequences of the user’s aggressive behavior have not only affected their dignity, but also their psychological integrity, and this in a lasting way,” writes administrative judge Danielle Tremblay.
The user’s behavior was such that all placement agencies refused to send staff to take care of her.
In December 2021, a home support nurse contacted the Commission des normes, de l’équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CNESST) to report a situation of physical and psychological violence.
In January 2022, the CNESST had ordered the employer to adopt corrective measures.
The inspectors had followed up to verify whether the measures adopted were controlling the risk of violence, then closed the file in March 2022.
The Tribunal ruled that the inspectors were wrong to close the case. It also returned the file to the CNESST for follow-up and to assist the employer in its efforts.
The employer had argued that its methods and techniques for controlling the risk of violence from users were “in normal times effective and sufficient” and that this user was a special case.
“Although in this instance it was not able to completely stop the recurrence of violent behaviour, the employer maintains that it implemented all reasonable means to minimize the risk of aggression associated with this user,” the Tribunal summarizes.
However, Administrative Judge Tremblay ruled differently and determined that the employer could and should do more.
“A diligent employer must act convincingly when faced with a danger that cannot be completely eliminated because it is inherent in the tasks assigned to workers. This commitment must be evident in their attitude and actions, both in their promptness in resolving the problem and in the quality of their efforts to mitigate its effects,” concluded Administrative Judge Tremblay.
She gives him six months to make the required corrections and takes into account that a similar situation could occur with other users.
“This timeframe takes into account several factors, such as the intensity of the employer’s due diligence obligation, since there is still a risk, or even an inherent danger, for home support workers to experience violence from users, a situation that the employer currently does not control.”
–This report by La Presse Canadienne was translated by CityNews
