A knee injury, a hidden camera, and a promised brace that never came
An Ontario employer installed a camera to watch an injured employee sit at his workstation, promised him a knee brace it never delivered, then let him go. A tribunal ruled the company failed to accommodate him, yet it avoided paying a cent in lost wages.
In a decision dated August 31, 2026, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario member Rosamaria Longo found that Footletic Inc., a footwear and orthotics company, discriminated against a former employee on the basis of disability and failed to accommodate his knee injury. Longo ordered the company to pay $20,000 for injury to the applicant's dignity, feelings and self-respect, but declined to award any lost wages.
A knee injury and a fraying relationship
The applicant began working for the company in May 2018 as a certified pedorthic technician. About five months later, he was injured while helping move a heavy grinding machine used in the shop, testifying that he felt a popping sensation in his knee followed by sharp pain. He kept working while attending physiotherapy but developed a limp that lasted for months.
As his recovery dragged on, the applicant testified, the company's co-owners grew unhappy watching him sit at his station and installed a camera to observe his work habits. One co-owner offered to have a business partner build him a custom knee brace, but the applicant testified it was never provided despite months of waiting.
Text messages entered as evidence showed the working relationship fraying over disputes about office Wi-Fi access, a requested raise, and being sent home during slow periods while a newly hired trainee kept working in his place. The applicant testified he began to suspect the company was training his replacement.
A tribunal duty to inquire, left unmet
Footletic did not take part in the merits hearing. An earlier interim decision found the company had stopped communicating with the tribunal and failed to follow its procedural directions, and deemed it to have waived its right to participate. The hearing went ahead by video conference in June 2026 on the applicant's evidence alone.
Applying the Supreme Court of Canada's test for workplace discrimination, Longo found the applicant had established a disability under the Human Rights Code through a workplace safety claim tied to his knee. She found the timing between his raising that claim, his repeated absences for knee pain, and his termination supported an inference that disability was a factor in the decision to end his employment.
Longo found that although the applicant never asked for a chair or a modified workstation, the company knew of his injury, had watched him struggle to work standing, and had gone as far as promising him a custom knee brace. Because that brace was never actually provided and the company looked no further into what else might help him do his job, Longo found the company had failed in its duty to accommodate the applicant.
Dignity damages, but no back pay
The applicant had sought $75,000 for injury to his dignity, feelings and self-respect, plus lost wages of just over $56,000. Longo noted that recent tribunal awards for workplace disability discrimination have ranged between $5,000 and $30,000, and set compensation at $20,000, weighing the seriousness of losing a job through discrimination against the applicant's roughly 10 months of service.
Despite finding discrimination, Longo declined to award any lost wages. She pointed to a heated exchange in which the applicant used inappropriate language toward a co-owner, an unanswered request for a raise before a new technician was hired to learn his duties, and other mounting workplace conflicts, concluding the employment relationship would have ended regardless of his disability.
Having found the applicant would have lost his job in any event, Longo wrote that he did not experience any lost income as a result of his workplace injury. She ordered Footletic to pay the $20,000 award within 30 days, along with pre and post judgment interest.
