THE PAPER TRAIL BCRTC DIDN'T EXPECT YOU TO FIND

A Consolidated Evidentiary Record of Address Falsification, Occupancy Misclassification, a Staged Test
Environment, and Jurisdictional Evasion — Claim No. 42647461

Mark Thomas Holand

Master reference record ~~ for adaptation to WorkSafeBC Review Division, City of Burnaby Building
Inspections Division, and-other proceedings as needed

BCRTC Operations & Maintenance Centre 1 (OMC1), 6800 14th Ave, Burnaby, BC

| auly 16, 2026

1. Executive Summary

Taken individuaily, any one BCRTC email in this record might be explained away as a typo, a
miscommunication, or an ordinary business decision. Taken together, the-internal record shows a

company that managed its paper trail, not its safety obligations, at every point where independent
scrutiny was about to arrive.

In the space of roughly three weeks, BCRTC management: (1) gave its own noise consultant two different
false addresses for the same room; (2) told that consultant the room was.a “server room” when its own
occupants and the consultant's later site mapping confirm it was an occupied training classroom; (3)
allowed testing to proceed on the broken machine itself — side panel off, improvised fan cooling in place
— and let that unshielded condition be certified as safe rather than remediating it; (4) received direct,
written notice fram the worker that this testing was flawed — and relied on it anyway; (5) celebrated
internally when WorkSafeBC denied the claim “based on our submissions”; and {6) when a separate
regulator (the City of Burnaby) began investigating the same installation, discussed whether an unrelated
statute (the Railway Act) could be used to dodge that regulator's authority altogether.

That pattern did not arise in isolation, and it did not end with the March 23, 2026 denial. Five weeks
before any of the events above, on the same day the worker took his first sick day for a workplace injury
ina thirty-year career, BCRTC’s own Labour Relations chain was already discussing his removal from
training and had labelled his safety report “vexatious” (Section 2, below). In the weeks after the denial,
BCRTC's Occupational Health department obtained the worker’s confidential medical file from his
physician on a consent form its own copy shows was never signed, then used that file to place his career
in jeopardy (Section 10, below). The record, start to finish, shows the same institution making the same
choice at every juncture: manage the paper trail rather than the underlying safety and privacy obligations
it owed the worker.

This document lays out that pattern in one place, with the underlying evidence, so that BCRTC's credibility
— not just the merits of any single decision — is squarely befare whichever body is reviewing this file.

2. Retaliatory Intent — The January 26, 2026 Plan to Remove the Worker While on
Sick Leave

The record does not begin with the March 2026 address. and testing irregularities catalogued in Sections
3-9, below. It begins five weeks earlier, on the same calendar day the worker took his first sick day for an
injury in a nineteen-year railway career — a day he was off work because of the acoustic exposure he had
reported through BCRTC’s own MyHSE hazard-reporting system four days earlier.

000285