The arbitrator noted that both sides clearly understood that the worker had to be medically cleared to return to work. The worker and the union co-operated by providing three letters in total from the worker’s physician indicating that the worker was fit to return to work, the arbitrator said.
However, the arbitrator found that there was a “stark difference” between the opinions of the worker’s physician and Nutrien’s medical review officer, who was an expert in the impairing effects of cannabis. This raised “sufficient doubt” about the physician’s conclusions and justified Nutrien seeking more information, the arbitrator said, noting that the workers’ physician didn’t provide specific answers about marijuana impairment.
“The union provided medical evidence, but I think it’s pretty clear why the employer had some issues with the specificity and the quality of that medical evidence,” says McGuinness. “I can see why the employer said, ‘We’re dealing with somebody in a safety-sensitive position, there are too many frailties with this evidence for us to reasonably reintroduce this person into the workplace and be confident that there’s not a potential OHS catastrophe lurking below the surface.’”
Entitled to more information about medical marijuana
The arbitrator noted that Nutrien suggested options to clarify the information through a consultation with the worker’s physician or an IME, but these…
Original Author Link click here to read complete story..
