View cases - Stewart McKelvey

55[185] Taking this into consideration, I conclude that it would be reasonable to reduce the amountawarded for lost of wages by thirty percent (30%).(iv)Pain and suffering[186] Section 53(2) of the CHRA provides for compensation for pain and suffering that thevictim experienced as a result of the discriminatory practice, up to a maximum of $20,000.[187] The Complainant testified that the whole situation was “deeply disturbing” and that it had“upset her very much”. She further added “I lost my career. I was discarded because I had kids.”She said that following the July 2005 letter of termination she was depressed: “I was shocked anddeeply affected. My family noticed the changes. I was irritable. I felt violated and that I had beentreated with no regards.”2010 CHRT 23 (CanLII)[188] Her husband also testified that after she was fired, the Complainant was “hurt, upset andirritable”.[189] No medical evidence was produced to substantiate these claims. Nevertheless, I agree thatCN’s conduct and nonchalant attitude towards her situations was disturbing for the Complainantand that it must have upset her. Taking, this into consideration, I order CN to pay to thecomplainant $ 15,000 in compensation for her pain and suffering.(v)Wilful or Reckless Conduct[190] Section 53(3) of the CHRA provides for additional compensation where the Respondenthas engaged in the discriminatory practice wilfully or recklessly up to a maximum of $20,000.[191] I agree that CN’s conduct in this case was reckless. CN had adopted an accommodationpolicy, in the form of the Accommodation Guidelines, which set out the procedures to be followedwith respect to any employees who required accommodation. This policy clearly identified“family status” as one of the ground for discrimination. Yet, CN and the senior managers