A Montreal police officer is fighting for compensation after she was shot at with live rounds during a training exercise.

A Quebec labour tribunal ruling on the incident suggests the SPVM may have tried to keep it under wraps.

Valérie Guay took the matter to Quebec's workplace health and safety board (CNESST) to have it recognized as a workplace accident. She said she developed post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of what happened.

According to the ruling, Guay was participating in an active shooter drill in April 2014 when another officer fired two live rounds in her direction. She was not struck by the shots and no medical consultation was done at the time.

A commander came to the station a few days later to do a "debriefing" on the event, the ruling says. Guay said staff was told the commander "did not want news of the accident to go around, so officers don't think they aren't safe at work."

She said understood that she was being told not to discuss the incident. She felt the incident was not being taken seriously, as no follow up was done with the other officers involved, the ruling says.

SPVM considered officer's leave to be personal

In Sept. 2015, when Guay was told she would be participating in another active shooter drill, she said she had a panic attack.

She reported her symptoms to her boss and sought psychiatric help, both through her employer and privately at her own cost. In 2016, a health care professional recommended she take a leave of absence.

A month after starting her leave, Guay saw that her pay had been cut. She was told she had used all of her sick days and she now was receiving disability insurance as opposed to her salary.

The officer expressed her shock that she was losing money due to a workplace accident. An SPVM representative then told her that her leave was personal, as the incident was never considered a workplace accident.

That also meant she could not receive compensation from the workplace health and safety board.

An incident must be reported to the CNESST within six months, but the board will accept a delay it considers reasonable. The officer reported the incident in 2017, three years after it happened, saying she had not realized it had never been considered a workplace accident. The CNESST accepted the reasoning.

The SPVM appealed that decision, arguing that the worker did not present a "reasonable reason" for the delay, since she had been aware of the symptoms since 2015 and had a "financial interest" to claim the costs of her private care in the clinic.

The tribunal upheld the CNESST's decision to accept the complaint, saying the delay was reasonable. The tribunal now must rule on whether the incident should be considered a workplace injury.