Paul Woods, who was fired on Monday as president and CEO of London Well being Sciences Centre (LHSC), has filed a $2.5 million lawsuit towards LHSC, claiming he was dismissed in unhealthy religion and that he notified board chair Amy Walby about his journey to the US since March final 12 months, first notifying her in June, then twice afterward.
The lawsuit filed Wednesday is claiming $1 million typically damages for “lack of repute,” plus $1.4 million in wage, pension and advantages in his contract, which was set to run out in January 2023. The declare can be asking LHSC for $100,000, saying the hospital breached sections of the Ontario Human Rights Code in how Woods was fired.
The assertion consists of allegations not but confirmed in courtroom and it is not clear but whether or not LHSC has filed an announcement of defence. LHSC, which operates London’s largest hospital and employs 15,000 individuals, has not but responded to a request for remark relating to the go well with.
Woods’s firing was publicly introduced Monday after LHSC revealed Friday that he had travelled to the US 5 instances since March, regardless of the federal authorities’s advice towards non-essential cross-border journey as a part of measures to curb the unfold of COVID-19.
On Friday, the board of administrators mentioned in an announcement that it continued to help the CEO’s management and that it “is conscious Dr. Woods continued to journey for private causes given the separation from his speedy household.”
In an announcement saying his firing Monday, LHSC mentioned “it had no advance discover of and didn’t approve his journey outdoors Canada.”
Declare cites emails with board chair
Nevertheless in his assertion of declare, Woods says he knowledgeable Walby and Susan Nickle, LHSC’s chief counsel and privateness officer, about his journey to the US, first in June and once more to the board chair in August and October.
The declare mentioned Woods, a Canadian citizen who holds everlasting resident standing within the U.S., was making the journeys to go to his daughter and his fiancée in Michigan as a result of he has no speedy household in London and that restrictions on U.S. journey “imposed important hardship” on him.
The declare states that on June 16 Woods mentioned the state of affairs with Walby and Nickle and despatched an e mail to Walby. The declare says Walby responded with an e mail that mentioned: “I respect the heads up in your have to journey to the US and the plan to self-isolate as required thereafter, and comfy that it matches into present coverage re WFH [Work from Home] for leaders.”
An Aug. 5 e mail from Woods to Walby cited within the declare says Woods knowledgeable her of his have to work remotely partially as a result of journey restrictions stop his fiancée, a U.S. citizen, from coming to London.
In that e mail Woods admits there could also be “some optics points” and asks: “Is that this one thing I ought to deliver to the Board?”
The assertion of declare cites an e mail Walby despatched to Woods the following day, Aug. 6, clearing him to journey to the U.S. As for the board’s approval, Woods says Walby instructed him this in an e mail: “I help what you might want to do on this. I do not suppose the Board must approve however we may give them a heads up.”
Declare calls LHSC assertion ‘inaccurate and defamatory’
Woods’s declare says the Jan. 11 assertion was “inaccurate and defamatory.”
It additionally says Woods was following Walby’s recommendation, and that she instructed no different approval was wanted.
In line with Woods’ declare, Walby “took it upon herself to talk for the Board about Dr. Woods’ deliberate journey. She suggested him that he didn’t want to hunt its approval. She took it upon herself to approve of his plans. At no time did she present steerage to Dr. Woods, who reported to her and the Board, that some other approval course of was wanted.”
Woods’s declare says the LHSC board’s Jan. 11 media assertion left the impression that Woods wasn’t upfront about his journey and “knowingly and intentionally created this impression to try to spare itself from criticism, whereas inaccurately trying to shift blame and accountability to Dr. Woods.”