Bell in-store policy ruled biased
TORONTO • The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal says Bell Canada discriminated against a seriously ill woman by forcing her to violate her doctor’s orders and go to a store in person in order to acquire a cellphone.
Linda Mills of London, Ont., was bedridden and recovering from both chemotherapy and a stroke at the time of the incident in July 2014.
The tribunal decision says Mills wanted to acquire a phone and activate it the same day, adding Bell Canada only offered that service in-store to people who could present photo ID.
Mills was under doctor’s orders to stay home due to her compromised immune system, so her son tried to collect the phone on her behalf.
The decision says Bell sales associates refused to account for these circumstances, forcing Mills to violate her doctor’s instructions in order to pick up the phone she needed to have on hand as a safety measure given her illness.
The tribunal found Bell discriminated against Mills on the grounds of disability and ordered the company to make its policies more accommodating within the next six months. Bell must also pay Mills $10,000 plus interest as compensation.
Mills said she looks forward to seeing new policies in place at the telecom giant, adding she pursued the complaint with the tribunal on behalf of those who may find themselves in a similar situation some day.
“I know there are a lot of people out there that can’t get to the store because they can’t drive or don’t have volunteers or they live alone,” Mills said in a telephone interview. “I thought, ‘Bell Mobility must have a way to help these people. It’s just not fair.’ ”
Mills’ ordeal began in 2013 when she was diagnosed with cancer. Mills said her medical condition caused her weight to drop to around 100 pounds and prompted her to go on longterm disability with the school board that employed her as a principal.
In July 2014, Mills said she was in the process of returning her board-issued cellphone. She felt it was important to have an immediate replacement on hand in case her precarious health took an unexpected turn, she said.
Bell contended that its policies were necessary to prevent fraud.
Mills, who had been a Bell customer for more than 40 years, ultimately decided to adhere to the policy in violation of all medical advice.
“It was an arduous and dangerous thing for her to do in her condition, but she felt she had no choice given she wanted it activated that day so her son could help her start using it while he was visiting her,” Edward Lustig wrote in the tribunal decision.
Bell spokesman Nathan Gibson said the company is working to implement the changes called for in Lustig’s decision, adding Bell takes its commitment to its customers with disabilities “very seriously.”