Summary
The Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) has confirmed that employee stress resulting from the employer’s discovery of the employee’s own criminal misconduct cannot be disguised as a compensable workplace injury or a recurrence of a prior Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (“PTSD”) entitlement.
Background Facts
A correctional officer (the “Worker”), appealed the denial of benefits for two separate claims: a recurrence of “PTSD” and a new entitlement for Chronic Mental Stress (“CMS”).
The Worker had a prior accepted claim for PTSD, after witnessing the aftermath of a co-worker’s suicide in 2008, but had returned to work. In April 2011, he went off work again, claiming a relapse of his condition due to a toxic work environment. He specifically cited derogatory cartoons drawn by colleagues, an amended incident report, someone breaking into his locker, and various messages including one reading “COCAINE COWBOY”, as evidence of harassment. However, shortly after leaving work, the Worker was arrested and later convicted of various criminal charges stemming from his misconduct at the workplace, including, among other things, breach of trust and conspiracy to traffic narcotics. Following these revelations, the Employer initiated its own investigation into the Worker’s misconduct and ultimately dismissed him due to his criminal misconduct. The Worker’s criminal trial resulted in a guilty verdict and he was sentenced to 18 months in prison.
The Worker filed a grievance for wrongful dismissal, as well as a human rights complaint for alleged discrimination on the basis of disability.
The Tribunal’s Decision
The Tribunal denied the appeal, finding that the Worker’s stress in 2011 was not a compensable injury, but rather a reaction to the realization that his criminal misconduct had been discovered. Regarding the PTSD recurrence claim, the Tribunal found no contemporaneous medical evidence of continuing or similar symptoms between the Worker’s return to work in 2008 and his leave in 2011. The Worker’s testimony attempting to explain this lack of evidence was found to be inconsistent and unpersuasive. Furthermore, the symptoms reported in 2011 were not clinically compatible with the original trauma of witnessing a suicide.
The Tribunal determined that the Worker’s arrest and conviction constituted a “significant new incident” that overwhelmed any remnants of the 2008 injury, effectively severing the chain of causation. Consequently, the Worker’s claim for a recurrence of the 2008 PTSD claim was denied.
The Tribunal also rejected the claim for CMS, finding that the injury was not caused by a substantial work-related stressor (as required by the CMS Policy) for three reasons:
- First, it determined that while the Worker was exposed to disrespectful conduct, this behaviour did not constitute harassment, but was instead non-compensable, interpersonal conflict when viewed within the specific context of the workplace culture. The credibility of the harassment claim was further undermined by the fact that the Worker did not report these incidents as harassment until his leave in April 2011.
- Second, the Tribunal concluded that the “Cocaine Cowboy” message triggered a psychological crisis not because it was bullying, but because it revealed that his colleagues were aware of his purported drug trafficking, which was a non-compensable event related to the Worker’s own criminal misconduct. Moreover, the behaviour the Worker was subjected to “did not rise to the level of being egregious or abusive” as required by the CMS Policy.
- Finally, the Tribunal found that any stress arising from the Employer’s investigation into this misconduct fell under the statutory exclusion for employment actions regarding discipline, for which a worker cannot be compensated.
In denying the CMS claim, the Tribunal once again observed that the Worker’s testimony lacked credibility and held that the Worker’s compensable PTSD was not a significant contributing factor to his criminal misconduct that resulted in his prosecution and conviction.
The Tribunal’s full decision can be found here: 2025 ONWSIAT 1132.
Takeaways
This decision delineates the boundaries of compensable stress, specifically establishing that the workers’ compensation system cannot be used to shelter employees from the psychological fallout of their own criminal misconduct. The Tribunal drew a clear distinction between stress arising from employment duties and stress arising from the fear of being caught.
Even though the precipitating event occurred in the workplace, the Tribunal determined that the Worker’s psychological reaction was a personal consequence of his illegal actions and the resulting prosecution and loss of employment.
This decision also reinforces the evidentiary threshold for establishing the recurrence of a psychological injury where there is a significant gap in time. The Tribunal’s rejection of the recurrence claim highlights the necessity of clinical compatibility and continuity of symptoms/care. For example, the Tribunal noted that the Worker’s symptoms in 2011 were fundamentally different from the symptoms associated with the original 2008 injury.
Finally, the decision offers some guidance on distinguishing between workplace harassment and non-compensable interpersonal conflict, as well as the higher threshold for entitlement under the CMS Policy. The Tribunal affirmed that not all unpleasant behaviour rises to the level of harassment and forms the basis of CMS entitlement.
Need more information?
For more information or assistance with workers’ compensation matters and WSIB business accounts, contact Hossein Moghtaderi at hmoghtaderi@filionlaw.com or your regular lawyer at the firm.