An employer does not need perfect medical information before the duty to accommodate becomes real. Elsobky v. Footletic Inc., 2026 HRTO 1342 shows how the obligation can arise from what the employer already knows about an employee's condition and the difficulties it is causing at work.
The employee suffered a knee injury at work. The employer knew about the injury, observed how it affected him, discussed accommodation and later ended the employment relationship. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario found that disability was connected to the adverse treatment and that the employer had not done enough to explore reasonable accommodation.
The tribunal awarded $20,000 for injury to dignity, feelings and self respect, with interest. It did not award the lost wages the employee sought. On the evidence, the tribunal concluded that the employment relationship would likely have ended for other reasons even without the discriminatory conduct, including mounting workplace conflict.
That split result is important. Human rights damages and wage loss are not the same inquiry. A failure to accommodate can justify compensation for the discriminatory harm even where the applicant cannot show that the discrimination caused the full period of income loss claimed.
The accommodation point is more practical. An employer that knows, or reasonably ought to know, that disability may be affecting an employee's ability to work cannot always wait for the employee to deliver a perfectly framed accommodation request. The duty can include asking reasonable questions and exploring what adjustments might allow the employee to continue working.
That does not mean employers must guess at diagnoses or accept any proposed arrangement. It means the process has to be genuine. The employer should identify the work limitation, understand what information is actually needed and consider workable options before deciding that the employment relationship cannot continue.
For HR teams, the case is a reminder that documentation should capture the accommodation process, not just the eventual decision. A file showing that everyone knew an employee was struggling, without showing what was explored in response, can leave a significant gap when the decision is later reviewed.