First Reference company logo

First Reference Talks

News and Discussions on Payroll, HR & Employment Law

decorative image

Federal Court

Most-viewed articles this week on HRinfodesk

The three most viewed articles on HRinfodesk this week deal with EI parental benefits for a twin birth, another federal court ruling on discrimination regarding childcare obligations and how an employer responded to online harassment of management.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Federal Court clarifies that the prohibited ground of “family status” includes “childcare obligations”

Do employers have to accommodate the “childcare responsibilities” of their employees to the point of undue hardship? The Federal Court has confirmed that in the federal jurisdiction the answer is yes subject to the requirement that the childcare responsibility be a “substantial parental obligation”.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Air Canada’s final offer to pilots had a questionable provision regarding mandatory retirement

As I mentioned recently, the arbitrator favoured Air Canada’s final offer to its pilots to resolve the labour dispute – the collective agreement will be effective until April, 2016.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Air Canada pilots’ mandatory retirement saga continues

As you may recall, Air Canada pilots launched human rights complaints on the ground of age discrimination because the company forced them to retire at age 60. In a history of decisions spanning back to 2007 challenging the Air Canada policy that requires pilots to retire at the age of 60, which section 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act purports to allow, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal recently made two more decisions. One involved…

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Air Canada pilots’ mandatory retirement saga – will it end with the tribunal’s third decision?

In July, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal made its third decision in the case of two Air Canada pilots who challenged the airline’s mandatory retirement policy. The tribunal decided in favour of Air Canada. Then, in August, the tribunal decided in a similar case involving 70 other Air Canada pilots. The tribunal again decided in favour of the airline, but for different reasons. For those hoping the July decision would settle the matter once and for all, the August decision is sure to confuse matters.

 

, , , , , , , , , ,

First damage award in PIPEDA case

Here’s something readers might want to know about: the Federal Court has awarded damages in a case based on the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act. Why is that special? Well, it’s the first damages award in the 10-year history of the Act.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Employees with disabilities – accommodation strategies (Part I)

Accommodating employees with disabilities to the point of undue hardship under human rights legislation can be a complicated task. It’s important to make sure the accommodation process goes smoothly and the employee can focus on working as efficiently as possible, but employers may not be sure about what kinds of questions to ask disabled employees in order to meet their needs.

 

, , , , , , , , ,