(a) the deficiencies of the member of a police force were brought to the member’s attention;

(b) the member of a police force was given a reasonable opportunity to bring their work performance up to an acceptable level or standard;

(c) where it was reasonable to do so, the member of a police force was afforded appropriate treatment, training, guidance, coaching or counselling to assist the member of a police force in reaching an acceptable level or standard of work performance;

(d) where it was reasonable to do so, the chief of police or civic authority, as the case may be, accommodated the needs of the member of a police force, if the member of a police force has a mental or physical disability as defined in the Human Rights Act that requires accommodation; and

(e) where a civic authority recommends the dismissal of a chief of police, there is just cause for the dismissal.

(a) the deficiencies of the member of a police force were brought to his or her attention;

(b) the member of a police force was given a reasonable opportunity to bring his or her work performance up to an acceptable level or standard;

(c) where it was reasonable to do so, the member of a police force was afforded appropriate treatment, training, guidance, coaching or counselling to assist the member of a police force in reaching an acceptable level or standard of work performance;

(d) where it was reasonable to do so, the chief of police or civic authority, as the case may be, accommodated the needs of the member of a police force, if the member of a police force has a mental or physical disability as defined in the Human Rights Act that requires accommodation; and

(e) where a civic authority recommends the dismissal of a chief of police, there is just cause for the dismissal.