A Greater Victoria Public Library worker who was asked to choose between her job or picking up her child from after-school daycare on time will get a hearing before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.

Tracy Obsniuk alleges that her employer, the Greater Victoria Public Library Board, discriminated against her based on her family situation by changing her work schedule “in a manner that interfered with her child care obligations.” children,” then “refused to provide reasonable accommodation.” »

In April 2019, Obsniuk worked as a library assistant at a GVPL branch Tuesday to Saturday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. At the time, she was the sole legal guardian of a five-year-old child who had to be picked up from after-school daycare at 5:30 p.m.

When the library implemented a standardized schedule for all staff, with Obsniuk’s changed to start at 10 a.m. and finish at 6 p.m., it was impossible for her to pick up her child on time. She was able to make alternate arrangements to pick up the vehicle with her family on two of the five work days.

“She asked that her schedule be changed from 9:15 a.m. to 5:15 p.m., which would allow her to pick up her child before the CPE closed. The library rejected this request,” the decision reads.

Instead, the library proposed an interim solution whereby Obsniuk would be allowed to leave work early on the days she was scheduled to pick up her child, for a period of three months. Meanwhile, Obsniuk was expected to try to find alternative child care that would allow him to work until 6 p.m.

After three months, Obsniuk met with her employer again and explained that she was unable to find an after-school program for her child’s school that was open after 6 p.m. The employer then told her she could leave early without pay or use her vacation time to pick up. her child until September of the same year.

In November 2019, Obsniuk met with the library again to explain that she had exhausted all options and that “the stress accompanying her schedule change was having a negative impact on her health.” A meeting has been scheduled for January 2020 to discuss next steps.

Obsniuk then took a month’s sick leave, saying it “was in part due to the stress caused by the change in his work schedule and the impact it had on his child care obligations “.

When she returned to work in January, the employer told Obsniuk that she could either keep her permanent position and work the required shifts, or leave her position and accept an on-call position with lower pay and no guaranteed shifts, or take a two-month position. unpaid leave to look for new childcare.

The employer told Obsniuk that “after two months, she would no longer be allowed to use unpaid leave or vacation time to change her schedule.” She chose to keep her permanent position and work a standardized schedule.

The library then closed its doors from March to June 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Upon reopening, Obsniuk remained in her role and experienced occasional scheduling conflicts, but her common-law partner obtained a new job in 2020 that allowed her to help with child care pickup .

In the ruling, tribunal member Theressa Etmanski said she was not convinced the employer had considered all options to accommodate Obsniuk’s child care obligations or require Obsniuk to Working a standardized schedule was absolutely necessary for the library to function.

She was also not convinced by the employer’s argument that requiring Obsniuk to take unpaid leave did not result in financial hardship, or that Obsniuk’s incapacity finding alternative child care was simply a matter of having enough time to search.

Etmanski denied the employer’s request to dismiss the case and the complaint will be heard.