TD Bank worker sues over firing during mental health leave

The paperwork dispute is the part of the complaint that records can settle. According to the filing, the worker's therapist submitted the required medical paperwork after she asked her supervisor on July 23, 2025 for a mental health day, and around August 1 she received an email confirming the Hartford had received it ^[6]. Around August 12, inquiring about payment, she heard from the Hartford for the first time that her paperwork had not arrived ^[7]. The Hartford's own records would show which of those two statements was accurate. The bank's two-day deadline, set by an HR representative on August 19, arrived 27 days after the July 23 request ^[8][11].

None of this is established. Every fact above is an allegation in the worker's complaint as reported by HCA, and the article does not include a response from TD Bank. Its account of the complaint stops at a bank email sent one day after her reply, so the termination date and the bank's stated reason are not in it. In that reply, according to the complaint, she wrote that she had "not and will not resign" from her position ^[9]. A single complaint also shows nothing about how TD Bank treats requests from other employees.

The decision for an employer this quarter is whether a leave or accommodation request is logged centrally the first time anyone hears it. The trade-off is direct. Central logging adds a step and takes judgment away from supervisors. Leaving requests with the supervisor keeps them quick and rests the employer's defence on one person's memory of a conversation. In our view the first costs less, because the allegations here concern what a supervisor said and scored at first contact ^[3][4]. The consequence arrives later: when a dispute reaches a court, we'd expect the question put to the employer to be what it knew and when, and the answer will come from whatever record it created at the time.