A woman who claims she was discriminated against at an Abbotsford McDonald’s restaurant because she was not wearing a face mask during the pandemic will have her complaint proceed through the BC Human Rights Tribunal.
The McDonald’s restaurant, the exact location of which is not revealed in BCHRT documents, had applied to have the woman’s complaint dismissed.
But BCHRT member Laila Said Alam determined the matter should proceed, although “denying an application to dismiss does not mean that the complainant will succeed at a hearing.”
The woman who filed the complaint said she previously had a blood clot in her lung and has difficulty breathing with a mask.
“Then (there is) the mental, emotional and psychological stress on top of that with trying to breathe with a mask on, as it is blocking the supply of access to oxygen. Any face covering/shield creates panic,” the woman wrote in her complaint.
ALSO SEE: Nanaimo thrift store facing human rights complaint from maskless shopper
The documents state that she entered McDonald’s on Nov. 20, 2020, when the restaurant was closed for dine-in service. Customers could order at the counter, at the drive-thru and through curbside pickup, mobile ordering and delivery services.
The tribunal documents state that McDonald’s offered two options if a customer entered the premises and said they could not wear a mask.
If there were no other customers, the person could be served at the counter. If there were customers at the counter, the individual could order and be served at the front door.
The woman alleges that she told staff she was exempt from wearing a mask and they refused her service.
The restaurant states that they asked the woman to wear a mask and, when she told them she was exempt, they offered her other options and she was not refused service.
McDonald’s also argued that the woman has not proved she has a disability-related barrier to wearing a mask, and the restaurant did not discriminate against her on those grounds.
Alam determined that the woman has established that she has a disability protected by the Human Rights Code, but the issue to be decided is whether she was discriminated against because of that.
“In this case, (she) must set out facts that, if proved, could establish that she has a characteristic protected by the Code, she was adversely impacted in services, and her protected characteristic was a factor in the adverse impact,” Alam wrote in her decision.
Alam encouraged both sides to attempt to resolve the issue first through mediation. If that is not successful, a hearing before the tribunal would be heard.
ALSO SEE: Tribunal finds B.C. fabric store didn’t discriminate against maskless customer