The employer took the matter to the Superior Court of Quebec for judicial review. The Supreme Court overturned the arbitrator`s decision. The Supreme Court has said that when an arbitrator considers a last-chance agreement, the only question in determining whether the termination is justified is whether or not the agreement was breached. The court also found that a last chance agreement does not neutralize an arbitrator`s power to order the reinstatement of an employee, unless expressly provided to that effect. The agreement in question was oral and there was no such waiver. As part of the last chance agreement, the employee should participate in a treatment program offered by the Personnel Assistance Program (PEA). The employee consulted a psychologist in accordance with the EAP, who recommended an ambulatory care program. Another interesting current case in this sense is Diageo Canada Inc., grievor had an alcohol addiction that had been taken into account by the employer for a certain period of time. He had a long disciplinary history and had undergone several treatments. At one point, due to attendance issues, the employer tried to impose a faincy agreement, which contained an abstinence clause that stated, „If you use drugs or alcohol, your employment relationship will end.“ The letter setting out the conditions also contained this warning: the CRT found that the redeployment agreement not only imposes compliance with certain conditions by the employee, but also binds the employer and imposes its obligation to promote the return and maintenance of the employee`s employment. What Mr. Saucier, although he had had problems with absenteeism before, was able to correct the situation when he returned and did not miss working days for reasons related to alcoholism. On the other hand, while the worker fulfilled all the conditions of the agreement, the city did not fulfil its obligations on the basis of test results which do not prove that he was under the influence of alcohol at work, that he subjected the worker to an expert without reason and that he dismissed Mr Saucier without a valid and sufficient reason.
The reinstatement of the employee was ordered by the RTA. Although different terms are used – Last Chance Agreements (LCAs), Never-Never Letters, conditional rehiring agreement – a tripartite agreement between the company, the union and the employees, which deals with the past and especially what is expected of the employee in the future, can be an effective instrument to give some employees a new and last chance to keep their jobs. In case of good organization, an ecological balance sheet can impose conditions of maintenance of employment that bind the parties to the company and an arbitrator. Here are some important legal and practical elements: for example, CACs are effective in managing misconduct such as chronic absenteeism or in defying employees with disabilities such as drug and alcohol. . . .