StatsCan employee’s discrimination claim rejected

Aylmer woman with Raynaud’s disease filed after cost of parking space doubled

Aylmer resident Line Lebeau wanted Statistics Canada to pay her $35,000 in compensation, alleging that her employer’s decision to double the price of her reserved parking space at Tunney’s Pasture amounted to discrimination based on disability.

But in a recent decision, the Public Service Labour Relations Board not only rejected her monetary claim, it also questioned whether Statistics Canada’s action was even discriminatory.

Lebeau, who has worked at Tunney’s Pasture since 2001, suffers from Raynaud’s disease, a blood circulation disorder that causes extremities, such as fingers and toes, to feel icy and numb when exposed to even moderate cold. Patients can also experience sharp pains.

After her diagnosis in 2005, Lebeau obtained a “medical/ accessible” parking permit from Statistics Canada. She paid the same $100-a-month parking fee as other employees.

However, in 2010, Public Works and Government Services Canada privatized parking for federal employees.

It decided that parking fees for employees such as Lebeau, who were classified as having “minor disabilities,” should double to $200 a month.

The monthly fee remained at $100 for employees who could produce disability parking permits issued by their province of residence, but Lebeau did not have one.

After Statistics Canada notified her of the new fee, she filed a grievance, which was rejected. She argued that her financial situation was already precarious, and the parking fee increase caused her financial stress.

In her grievance, Lebeau said she had a “strong impression” that Statistic’s Canada’s decision meant it did not consider her as valuable as other employees.

“She felt humiliated,” the PSLRB decision says. “Her self-esteem was affected. She suffered from insomnia and depression because of the situation.”

In November 2012, Statistics Canada decided to offer Lebeau and others like her reserved parking at the same price as general parking. It also reimbursed her $2,460 for the parking premium she had been required to pay, though she did not receive the money until this April.

Despite that, Lebeau decided to pursue her grievance with the labour relations board. She asked the board to order her employer to pay her $15,000 for pain and suffering, and a further $20,000 in special compensation for acting “wilfully and recklessly.”

Adjudicator Michael Bendel rejected both claims in his decision, dated Oct. 24.

He said Lebeau filed no evidence of pain and suffering other than her own testimony, and ruled that Statistics Canada did not act recklessly or unreasonably.

Bendel also said he “had doubts” about whether Statistics Canada’s parking policy was even discriminatory.

He noted that the agency increased the price of reserved parking spots only for employees with disabilities who didn’t have a provincial parking permit. “How can Statistics Canada be criticized for making the same distinction as provincial authorities?” he asked.

Bendel also pointed out that Lebeau’s simplest recourse would have been to obtain a provincial permit herself. “That is far easier and more direct than entering into a lengthy dispute with Statistics Canada, filing a grievance and referring it to adjudication.”

Lebeau could have ob-