View cases - Stewart McKelvey

[23] Mr. Vatcher testified that, later in 1993, he discussed with Mr. Pannu the implications ofthe new procedures for his beard and that Mr. Pannu expressed concern about what the procedurewould mean for him. Mr. Pannu denied this conversation. However, his recollection of theevents was not always clear or consistent, whereas Mr. Vatcher’s recollections were. I preferMr. Vatcher’s evidence on this point; I accept that Mr. Vatcher spoke to Mr. Pannu about thematter.[24] Mr. Vatcher also discussed the new emergency evacuation procedure and Mr. Pannu’sbeard within Skeena management and with the Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers of Canada, Local4 (the “Union”). In its November and December 1993 meetings with the Union (Ex. 6, Tab 13,14), Skeena raised the question of revising its 1981 beard policy (Ex. 12) and designatingadditional positions as “no beard” positions or making “no beards” a mill-wide requirement.There is no record that any agreement was reached, nor is there any evidence of what, if any,progress was made on the issue between December 1993 and March 1994, when the WCBintervened.[25] Thus, although Skeena finalized its emergency procedure in 1993 and required theRecaust Operator and ARO to wear SCBAs in the event of a gas emergency, it did nothing toenforce that policy with respect to Mr. Pannu. Mr. Vatcher agreed that Skeena did not considerwriting an emergency procedure that would designate someone other than the Recaust Operatorto do the shut down. Nor did it attempt to remove Mr. Pannu from his Recaust Operator positionand place him elsewhere in the mill.[26] Skeena allowed Mr. Pannu to continue to work as a Recaust Operator even though hecould not have complied with its emergency procedures. Skeena likely acted as it did because itcould see no easy solution to the conflict between its emergency procedure and Mr. Pannu’sreligious practice. It tried to avoid the issue instead. However, as Mr. Vatcher testified, everyonewho worked in the recaust department knew that Mr. Pannu could not safely do an emergencyshut down and understood that, on his shift, the ARO and Utilityman would likely have to do itinstead. The recaust employees were unhappy with the situation. However, it continued forseveral months until the WCB stepped in again on March 9, 1994.6