Ruling spells out what employers must do before pulling the trigger
In a decision issued April 9, 2026, British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal Member Jonathan Chapnick ruled that Colliers Project Leaders Inc. discriminated against an assistant project manager when it terminated his employment roughly seven weeks into the job, before completing the accommodation inquiry it had already started. The Tribunal ordered the company to pay $24,615.20 in lost wages and $15,000 for injury to dignity, plus interest.
Ali (Alex) Shaikh started at Colliers on January 6, 2020, seconded to the company's biggest client on a building improvement program. Within weeks, the client raised concerns about his "fit," focus, and engagement during training, project onboarding, and meetings. Colliers principal Brendan Wilson met with Shaikh on January 22 to relay the feedback.
The next day, Shaikh disclosed an anxiety diagnosis and other medical conditions affecting his interactions with colleagues. Senior HR manager Erma Hadzic met with him on January 27 to assess accommodation needs. Shaikh requested a stand-up desk for back pain but made no specific request related to anxiety, testifying he had not yet seen his doctor.
He later told the Tribunal that accommodation "cannot be just seen as something that simply I demand and then I will be granted," describing it as a "two-way — or even a three-way — conversation actually, between me, Colliers, and my medical practitioners." A Functional Abilities Form completed by his doctor on February 11 flagged mild cognitive limitations and noted he had been referred to a specialist, with an "update to follow."
The events that sealed his fate
On February 6, Colliers received further client feedback alleging Shaikh had disrupted the client's building improvement manager with "irrelevant/misguided questions" despite prior instruction, and that another client representative had observed him socializing and watching videos on his cellphone during work hours to an excessive degree.
During a February 10 call with Hadzic, Shaikh said he felt harassed by Colliers. That evening, he initiated an internal complaint through Colliers' ethics and compliance hotline, expanded through reports between February 12 and 18. On February 18, he was removed from the client program. During a harassment investigation interview on February 20, Shaikh told Hadzic he intended to contact witnesses, including a client employee referred to as MA, and reached out to MA that day. Chapnick found Hadzic "did not prohibit him from, or even caution him against, doing so."
Colliers decided to terminate Shaikh's employment on February 24, with the termination letter delivered February 25, citing performance issues and his direct contact with the client. Shaikh attended his psychiatrist consultation on February 27, two days after being fired. The resulting report diagnosed generalized anxiety disorder, persistent depressive disorder, and somatic symptom disorder, and found he met the criteria for several personality disorders.
Possible connection between performance issues, disability
Chapnick found Shaikh's disability "caused or contributed to him: being disorganized; having difficulties with focus and concentration; not paying (or appearing not to pay) attention in interactions with colleagues; and behaving in ways that could be viewed as excessive socializing." Shaikh testified his generalized anxiety disorder "generally manifests as nervousness, restlessness, and chattiness," which in the workplace could look like socializing.
On the duty to accommodate, Chapnick wrote, "Colliers did not need to disregard the Client's performance feedback regarding Mr. Shaikh, nor was it required to ignore the Client's related request for his removal from the BI program. However, before acting on the Client's concerns and wishes in a way that adversely impacted Mr. Shaikh in his employment… Colliers was obligated to make reasonable inquiries into the possible connection between the reported performance issues and Mr. Shaikh's disability."
The Tribunal applied a 50 per cent contingency deduction to Shaikh's $129,230.40 wage claim and deducted $40,000 for estimated consulting income, producing the final $24,615.20 award. Chapnick concluded that Colliers "foreclosed the possibility of any reasonable, substantive accommodation outcomes by unreasonably terminating Mr. Shaikh's employment during the inquiry stage of the process."
See Shaikh v. Colliers Project Leaders Inc. (No.2), 2026 BCHRT 93.
