FAQ's Cases - Stewart McKelvey

University of Ottawa, 2010 HRTO 477, at para. 6. This is not about whether theapplicant was a “good” employee; nor is it about whether the respondent TTC should orshould not have created a new position for the applicant or found some other way tokeep the applicant employed. There is insufficient evidence to find, on the balance ofprobabilities, that there was any discriminatory or Code-related basis for the respondentTTC’s decision to terminate the applicant.CONCLUSION[28] I find that the applicant did satisfy the threshold for establishing a disability. Histermination, unfortunately, coincided with the employer’s completion of its plan to adoptits usual business model.2012 HRTO 1489 (CanLII)[29] It was the respondent TTC’s view that the applicant was not disabled in anyevent. Notwithstanding that, there was no position available for the applicant as ofFebruary, 2010 regardless of whether he was fit for work or not. The decision toterminate him was simply not based upon any prohibited ground of discrimination underthe Code.DECISION[30] For all the foregoing reasons, the Application is dismissed.Dated at Toronto, this 31 st day of July, 2012.“Signed by”________________________________Kevin CleghornMember