As part of the Last Chance Agreement, the employee should enter a treatment program proposed by the Personnel Assistance Program (AAP). The employee consulted a psychologist under the AAP, who recommended an outpatient program. Employers generally strive to retain current employees because an experienced employee can add value to a business and because the high costs associated with recruiting and training new employees are attributable. If employees have temporary problems that lead them to violate company guidelines, to the point where they are about to be fired, employers should consider a last chance (also called a fixed choice) to keep the employee while protecting the business. A last-chance agreement is an agreement between an employer and an employee that defines the conditions the worker must meet in order to keep his or her job. Although employers are not required to offer last-chance agreements under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), these agreements are often used for workers who have relapsed drug or alcohol dependent and whose current drug or alcohol use is causing problems in the workplace. In the absence of exceptional circumstances, Canadian policy makers will generally refuse to intervene where the history of the labour relationship warrants a long-drawn last-chance agreement. But not always. Unifor, Local 174 v. Cascades Fine Papers Group Inc., Rolland Division is an example of a situation in which the Quebec Court of Appeal, despite an oral agreement between the worker and the employer, ordered the reinstatement of the licensee dismissed for violating the terms of the last chance agreement. The employer took the case to the Quebec Superior Court for judicial review.

The Supreme Court overturned the arbitrator`s decision. The Supreme Court has ruled that if an arbitrator is dealing with a last-chance agreement, the only question to be decided is whether the dismissal is justified is whether the agreement was violated or not. On June 3, 2010, the employee struck a column in the warehouse while driving a forklift. A post-accident blood alcohol test revealed that the employee was intoxicated during the forklift ride. But the employee had 35 years of service. Thus, the employer entered into a last oral chance with the worker instead of dismissing him. It may be helpful to give the employee general time frames to meet each of the terms of the last-chance agreement, to ensure that the employee moves forward towards a return to work and productivity.