SCC Declares Termination for Impairment in the Workplace Not Discriminatory
Canadian Courts have long wrestled with the protection of human rights in the context of workplace drug and alcohol policies.
Canadian Courts have long wrestled with the protection of human rights in the context of workplace drug and alcohol policies.
A recent New Brunswick Labour Adjudication decision addressed the sensitive issue of terminating permanently disabled employees on long-term disability leave (“LTD”).
New Brunswick is about to join the bandwagon by adding “family status” as a protected ground in its Human Rights Act. All other jurisdictions in Canada have already made this move.
Yes, it’s 2017, but gender discrimination continues to persist in many workplaces. Discrimination in employment on the basis of gender is contrary to human rights legislation and leaves an employer vulnerable to liability for its wrongful conduct.
Misetich v Value Village Stores Inc., 2016 HRTO 1229 (“Misetich”), a recent decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”) that considered an employee’s eldercare responsibilities, casts doubt on the correct legal test to be applied in cases of family status discrimination.
This year, a Nova Scotia Human Rights Board of Inquiry issued a highly publicized decision on racial profiling. In the case, the Board concluded that a woman had discriminated against on the basis of her race and/or colour when wrongfully accused of shoplifting at a grocery store.
Accommodating the extended absence of an employee who is off work due to illness or disability can be a difficult task for employers.
Under the Nova Scotia Human Rights framework, a Board of Inquiry must approve any settlement reached after a complaint is referred to a hearing before the Board.
In May of 2016, in Fair v Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, 2012 HRTO 350, an Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a Human Rights Tribunal with important implications for employers in relation to the duty to accommodate and the jeopardy of reinstatement.
In Flatt v Canada (Attorney General), 2015 FCA 250 (CanLII), the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) visited the issue of whether the decision to breastfeed one’s child is protected by human rights legislation.