5/2/26, 8:14 AM Gmail - File Number 2026D316 — Evidentiary Update regarding Prohibited Action (Section 47)

a | Gr ! ail mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com>

File Number 2026D316 — Evidentiary Update regarding Prohibited Action (Section 47)

2 messages

mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com> Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 5:18 AM
To: "Prohibited Action (SM)" <prohibitedaction@worksafebc.com>
Cc: mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com>

To: WorkSafeBC Prohibited Action Branch

Re: File Number 2026D316 — Evidentiary Update regarding Prohibited Action (Section 47)
Worker: Mark Holand (Employee ID: HOL12)

Employer: British Columbia Rapid Transit Company (BCRTC)

Subject: Documentary Proof of Premeditated Retaliation and Administrative
Misdirection

This submission provides critical evidence from the official WorkSafeBC Claim File and Translink Freedom of
Information (FOI) disclosures. These documents demonstrate that the adverse action taken against me was not
performance-based, but a retaliatory response to a protected safety report.

1. The "Vexatious” Fabrication (The Jan 26 "Smoking Gun")

The decision to remove me from my position was made within 72 hours of my first safety report, as evidenced by
internal communications.

e The Evidence: On January 26, 2026 (FOI Doc pg. 183), Manager Austen Puder initiated demotion
proceedings and characterized my reporting as "vexatious."

¢ The Fabrication: Management claimed | was "threatening" them with WorkSafeBC on Jan 26.
¢ The Rebuttal: My WhatsApp logs (Claim File pg. 248) and Cority filings (FOI Doc pg. 184-187) from
that same period prove | never mentioned WorkSafeBC. | was actively engaged in training and seeking

internal remediation for a physical injury.

¢ Conclusion: The employer invented a "threat" to justify a prohibited action while | was following all internal
safety and training protocols.

2. The Employer Protest: Proof of Administrative Bad Faith

The Employer Protest (Claim File pg. 456) represents a formal record of the employer’s attempt to discredit my
injury.

¢ The Discrepancy: The Protest denies the existence of a hazard, yet the Jan 26 email (FOI Doc pg. 183)
proves the decision to target me was already made before any medical or technical investigation occurred.

¢ The Silence: The "vexatious" label applied by management on Jan 26 is the reason my safety concern
was never investigated under OHS Regulation 3.19. They did not investigate the hazard; they
investigated how to remove the person reporting it.

3. Systematic Misdirection: The "Address and Label" Shell Game

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=7 1cd554d908&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a:r825647 76999977994 &simpl=msg-a:r32165677325151413... 1/5