6/15/26, 2:45 PM Gmail - File Number 2026D316 — URGENT ESCALATION OF PROHIBITED ACTION

r 4| .
Gi Y dail mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com>

File Number 2026D316 —- URGENT ESCALATION OF PROHIBITED ACTION

4 messages

mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com> Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 11:59 AM
To: "Prohibited Action (SM)" <prohibitedaction@worksafebc.com>

To: WorkSafeBC Prohibited Action Branch

Re: File Number 2026D316 - URGENT ESCALATION OF PROHIBITED ACTION

Worker: Mark Holand (Employee ID: HOL12)

Employer: British Columbia Rapid Transit Company (BCRTC)

Subject: Evidence of Ongoing Retaliation — Threat of Termination (Received April 24, 2026)
Dear Investigator,

| am forwarding the attached "Notice to Comply" letter, delivered to me today by BCRTC, as evidence of active
and ongoing retaliation under Section 47 of the Workers Compensation Act.

Since filing my Prohibited Action complaint on April 9, the employer has escalated their adverse actions. They are
now attempting to manufacture "just cause" for termination by labeling my medically supported absence as
"Absent Without Leave" (AWOL) and threatening my employment status.

Please add this document to my file and note the following critical connections to the previously submitted
evidence:

1. The "Navi Gill" Retaliation Nexus This threat of discipline is signed by Navi Gill (Labour Relations). As
proven by the internal FOI documents already in my file, Navi Gill is the direct recipient of the January 26, 2026
email from Austen Puder—the exact email where management labeled my safety reporting "vexatious" and
plotted my demotion. This letter is not a routine administrative follow-up; it is the continuation of the January 26
retaliatory campaign executed by the exact same personnel.

fom)

2. Manufacturing Cause During an Active Investigation The employer used staged noise testing (the "Server
Room" at 6700 Southridge) to disallow my initial WorkSafeBC claim, thereby forcing me onto their internal sick
leave protocols. They are now weaponizing the administrative burden of those protocols to threaten my

employment, specifically because | have escalated my safety reports to the City of Burnaby and the Prohibited
Action Branch.

fom)

3. Harassment via Mandatory Phone Communications The employer is attempting to mandate phone contact.
Given the documented history of administrative deceit (altering worksite addresses) and bad faith (fabricating
WorkSafe threats), | cannot safely communicate with this employer via phone. For my own psychological safety
and to maintain an immutable evidentiary record, | require all communications with the employer to be in writing.
The employer's insistence on undocumented phone calls is a tactic to circumvent accountability.

fom)

lam currently under the care of my doctor and awaiting specialist assessment for the acoustic trauma sustained

in their unpermitted workspace. The employer's threat to review my employment status by April 30 is a direct
reprisal for my protected safety activities.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=7 1cd554d90&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a:r34 11140328578536232&simpl=msg-a:r-565249427486029... 1/6