First Reference company logo

First Reference Talks

News and Discussions on Payroll & Employment Law

decorative image

Human rights complaint

Employer failed in duty to accommodate by not considering employment beyond pre-injury position

In the recent decision Fair and Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal provides a useful guide for employers to follow in determining how to return an employee to the workplace after an extended absence.

 

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

Yet another reason for employers to avoid ‘locker-room mentality’ at work

Just in case employers needed yet another reason to be careful to ensure that employees in their workplaces treat one another with respect and avoid a “locker room mentality”, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has provided one. In Lombardi v. Walton Enterprises, (2012) HRTO 1675 the Tribunal found a corporate employer and Assistant Manager jointly and severally liable for homophobic slurs directed at an employee.

 

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

What do you do when your employees won’t come to work?

In recent years, employers seem to be struggling with “missing employees” that provide vague doctors’ notes and then disappear, assuming their job is safe. What can employers do? Do you have the right to ask for medical information? Can they dismiss the employee if they don’t provide proper justification for their absence?

 

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

Responding to a human rights complaint

As an employer it is always possible that your organization will become involved in a human rights complaint— most likely as the respondent. Being the respondent means that a complaint has been filed against you, probably by an employee, former employee, customer or other member of the general public. You must respond in writing to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) within 35 days in order to preserve your legal rights.

 

, , , , , , ,

Human Rights Tribunal scrutinizes medical note in allegation of discrimination on the basis of disability

Human Resources practitioners are constantly confronted with medical notes from employees that do not provide any meaningful medical information (i.e. Bob is off work for 2 weeks because he is under doctor’s care). In addition, some employees who are disciplined or terminated after submitting these less than informative medical notes will file human rights complaints alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of a disability. Recently, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) had a chance to comment on these all too common issues…

 

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

What is reverse discrimination?

Two men are holding hands and occasionally kissing while waiting in line at a driver licensing office. A person waiting in line approaches the men calling them “fags” and telling them their behaviour is “disgusting”. The same person attempts to engage others waiting in the line to join in the demeaning discourse…

 

, , , , , , , ,

Mandatory retirement has been eliminated − is anyone listening?

Old habits die hard. The Human Resources industry is obviously having a hard time abandoning the notion that 65 is the accepted age for retirement. Since amendments to the Ontario Human Rights Code in 2006, employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees based solely on age. Prima facie compelling retirement at age 65 is a breach of the Code.

 

, , , , , , , , , , ,

When aggression and the workplace collide

Aggression sometimes occurs in the workplace. That is a fact! And when conflicts are left unresolved, employers have employees resigning or taking tremendous amounts of sick leave to deal with these issues, or the aggression crosses the line into assault or battery, or you receive a human rights or occupational health and safety complaint.

 

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