Worker filed over 50 FOI requests but has been turned away by the province's workers' compensation appeal tribunal
A British Columbia worker who spent years gathering documents through more than 50 freedom of information requests has been turned away by the province's workers' compensation appeal tribunal in her bid to reopen a denied bullying claim.
In a decision dated April 14, 2026, Vice Chair Deirdre Rice denied the reconsideration application filed by the worker, a community policing coordinator with a local government authority who served as her union local’s president from 2016 to 2018. The worker had sought to revive her workers’ compensation claim for an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression tied to 10 workplace incidents between January 2018 and January 2019.
An 'overkill' meeting at the centre of the dispute
Much of the dispute centred on a December 6, 2018, workplace meeting held after the worker fell while skating during work hours on November 29. Human resources and senior management called the meeting to clarify whether the worker had permission to be away from the office and whether she might file a compensation claim.
The worker described the meeting in her submissions as bullying and harassment, arguing at various points that it was really a disciplinary inquiry into "time stealing" or a privacy breach. The employer maintained the meeting was investigatory and not disciplinary.
In a follow-up email reproduced in the decision, a senior director wrote: "I acknowledged that it was a bit overkill and pretty soon after we got into the discussion we realized that a formal investigation wasn't really required." The original WCAT panel, in a September 14, 2020, ruling, found the meeting did not amount to a traumatic event or significant work-related stressor under section 135(1)(a) of the Workers Compensation Act.
Years of FOI requests and a 'fishing expedition' label
After her initial claim was denied on January 28, 2019, and her review rejected on November 29, 2019, the worker filed her reconsideration application on February 26, 2021, relying on new evidence drawn from FOI requests to the employer and a local law enforcement authority. By her counsel's account, the materials were intended as a "forensic reconstruction" of how the employer treated her after she became union president in 2016.
The employer's lawyer pushed back, characterizing the worker's effort as a "fishing expedition" and arguing much of the evidence had been available at the time of the original hearing or could have been obtained with reasonable diligence. The lawyer noted the worker had filed over 50 FOI requests between 2019 and the end of 2021.
Rice agreed. She concluded that reconsiderations are not meant to give appellants a second chance to put forward evidence they could have raised the first time around, particularly where the underlying facts had not materially shifted.
Good-faith management decisions
The tribunal reaffirmed that workplace meetings that feel intense to employees can still fall within the management decisions exemption in section 135(1)(c) of the Act when conducted in good faith. The original panel had found that the employer did not act in bad faith, did not engage in targeted harassment, and did not act reprehensively or egregiously toward the worker across any of the ten incidents she identified.
Rice signalled a high bar for reopening completed claims based on documents gathered long after the fact. "I find that, overall, the worker's application amounts to an attempt to restate her position and to reargue the evidence related to the original decision," she wrote.
The reconsideration application was denied. The original WCAT decision remains in force. The worker did not request reimbursement of expenses, and none was ordered.
