discrimination in employment

Smokers need not apply: can Ontario employers refuse to hire nicotine users?

February 14, 2020 Vey Willetts LLP Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Recruiting and Hiring, 0

As of February 1, 2020, U-Haul no longer hires nicotine users in 21 of the US states in which it operates. The company, which employs over 30,000 people across the US and Canada, announced this new policy late last year. While it may be easy to understand U-Haul’s stated rationale for introducing this anti-tobacco policy, to adopt the same in Ontario would likely expose the company to liability.

discrimination in employment, employment application, employment law, health, human rights code, nicotine users, smoking, tobacco use disorder

Full and final: Human rights application successfully barred by signed release

February 7, 2020 Rudner Law, Employment / HR Law & Mediation Employee Relations, Employment/Labour Standards, Human Resources, Human Rights, Notice, Damages and Settlements, Payroll, 0

In recent years, one of the recurring circumstances where the efficacy of a signed release has been debated is where a former employee files an application with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.

discrimination in employment, Dismissal, employment law, Employment release, mental health, releases for dismissed employees, termination of employment

Recent case assessment direction and “creed”

September 25, 2019 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Recruiting and Hiring, 0

The Halton District Catholic School Board posted a job advertisement for a contract position. The applicant replied to the advertisement, and when he was not selected for the position he filed a complaint at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario alleging discrimination on the ground of creed.

CAD, Case Assesment Direction, code-related allegations, creed, discrimination in employment, employment law human rights, human rights, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Kevin Sambrano human rights paralegal, Ontario Human Rights Code, Ontario human rights commission, religious discrimination

Maternity and parental leave policies: To top up, or to tap out? That is the question…

September 17, 2019 Piccolo Heath LLP Employee Relations, Employment/Labour Standards, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Payroll, Pensions and Benefits, 0

New York-based bank JP Morgan Chase has recently been getting a lot of attention in the media after paying a hefty 5 million dollars to settle charges that their parental leave policy was discriminatory towards their male employees. It is believed that the settlement will impact up to 5,000 fathers who were denied parental leave benefits.

discrimination based on sex, discrimination complaint, discrimination definition, discrimination in employment, discrimination on the ground of family status, employee morale, employment law, Human Rights code of Ontario, maternity leave, parental leave, paternity leave

5 questions to consider when exploring the duty to accommodate

August 14, 2019 Occasional Contributors Employee Relations, Human Resources, Human Rights, 0

Canadian human rights law also imposes a duty to accommodate. This requires employers to ensure that persons with characteristics protected under the Code are not unfairly excluded where working conditions can be adjusted.

bona fide occupational requirement, disability–based discrimination, discrimination in employment, duty to accommodate, duty to accommodate an employee with a disability, employment law, flexibility, physical or mental disabilities, prohibited grounds of discrimination, protected grounds of discrimination

Alberta Human Rights Tribunal adopts findings of Workers’ Compensation Board

June 10, 2019 Employer Advisor, McCarthy Tétrault LLP Employee Relations, Human Resources, Human Rights, 0

In Kebede v. SGS Canada Inc., 2019 AHRC 3, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal recently dismissed a portion of a human rights complaint on the grounds that the issue was already decided by the Alberta Workers’ Compensation Board.

discrimination, discrimination in employment, employment law, human rights

Can an employer terminate an employee for just cause if they were charged with a criminal offense?

May 4, 2017 Jeff Dutton, Dutton Employment Law Employee Relations, Employment/Labour Standards, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Notice, Damages and Settlements, Payroll, Pensions and Benefits, Source Deductions and Reporting, Wages and Compensation

The laying of a criminal charge alone does not constitute just cause (i.e. dismissal without notice) in every instance. In order to summarily dismiss an employee for being charged with a criminal offense, the employer must show that there is some connection between the charge and the employer.

criminal charge, criminal offence, discrimination in employment, employment law, just cause, Merritt v Tigercat Industries, record of offences, sexual assault

Summary hearings and the burden of proof at the HRTO

September 28, 2016 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Human Resources, Human Rights

For an application to be fully processed at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the applicant must establish a nexus or “connection” between the protected ground they are alleging and the conduct of the respondent. This was reiterated in the recent summary hearing of Wasty v. Long Wolf Real Estate Technologies.

Dabic v Windsor Police Services, discrimination in employment, employment law, employment relationship, HR issues, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decisions, jurisdiction, Kevin Sambrano, Lomotey v. Kitchener Waterloo Multicultural Centre, Murray v. YouthLink, prohibited grounds, race and colour, racism, Summary Hearings, termination, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, Wasty v. Lone Wolf Real Estate Technologies

Discriminatory grounds such as family status, age, marital status, etc. that deal with the duty to accommodate

August 30, 2016 Rubin Thomlinson LLP Employee Relations, Employment/Labour Standards, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights

The Ontario Human Rights Code lists a number of personal characteristics protected from discrimination: race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability. These personal characteristics are often referred to as “protected grounds”. An employer is prohibited from discriminating against an employee on the basis of any protected ground.

accommodation process, direct discrimination, discrimination in employment, discriminatory grounds, duty to accommodate, employment law, human rights code, indirect discrimination, protected grounds, protection from discrimination, request for accommodation

Does the Tribunal have the power to deal with allegations of “unfairness” at work?

August 26, 2016 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, Human Resources, Human Rights

Whether or not the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has the power to deal with general allegations of unfairness in the workplace was recently revisited in Murray v. YouthLink.

ancestry, Dabic v Windsor Police Services, discrimination in employment, employment law, employment relationship, ethnic origin, HR issues, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decisions, jurisdiction, Kevin Sambrano, Murray v. YouthLink, NOID, Notice of Intent to Dismiss, prohibited grounds, race and colour, racism, Summary Hearings, termination, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure

Can an employee “sign away” their human rights?: Brown v. Prime Communications Canada Inc.

July 27, 2016 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, Employment/Labour Standards, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights

The question of “can an employee “sign away” their human rights?” became relevant in a recent case. After signing a release with her employer, the Applicant filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of sex contrary to the Human Rights Code.

Better Beef Ltd. v. Maclean, Brown v. Prime Communications, coercion of will, discrimination based on sex, discrimination in employment, duress, employment relationship, employment standards, employment standards act, full and final employment releases, HR issues, Human Rights code of Ontario, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Kevin Sambrano, maternity leave, notice period, pregnancy, termination, the Code, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure

To defer or not to defer a human rights application: What are the relevant questions?

June 22, 2016 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Accessibility Standards, Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Integrated Accessibility Regulation, Notice, Damages and Settlements, Payroll, Standard for Employment

Where the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario finds there is a separate proceeding that may involve similar facts, the Tribunal has discretion to defer consideration of an application until the proceeding has been completed. Such was the question, whether or not to defer the application in the recent interim order in West v.Yogen Fruz Canada Inc.

2016 HRTO 777, civil suit was pending, deferral of applications, Disability, discrimination in employment, Human Rights code of Ontario, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Human Rights Tribunal Rules of Procedure, interim decisions, Kevin Sambrano, policies and procedures, Rule 14.1, termination, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, West v. Yogen Fruz Canada Inc.

Summary hearings at the HRTO: Is an alternative explanation enough?

May 13, 2016 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Notice, Damages and Settlements, Payroll, Union Relations, Wages and Compensation

When a respondent is first made aware that a Human Rights application has been filed against them, often their first response is to deny any accusations and to request a summary hearing in hopes of disposing of the matter at the outset. While such hearings may be requested, it does not always work to the advantage of the respondent. Such was the case in the recent Interim Decision of Lomotey v. Kitchener Waterloo Multicultural Centre.

2016 HRTO 428, ancestry, collaborative agreements, colour, discrimination in employment, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decisions, Kevin Sambrano, Lomotey v. Kitchener Waterloo Multicultural Centre, not-for-profit, ontario, place of origin and ethnic origin, prohibited grounds, race, race and colour, racial profiling, racism, reasonable prospect of success, Reis v. Mississauga, Rule 19A.6, stereotypes, Summary Hearings, Tribunal process, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure

When can employers draw the line? The duty to accommodate and undue hardship

December 17, 2014 Devry Smith Frank LLP Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights

In Perron v Revera Long Term Care Inc., the Human Rights Tribunal held that an employer’s duty to accommodate does not include a duty to create a new position, fundamentally change working conditions, assign the essential duties of an employee with a disability to other employees or to hire another employee to perform them in the employee’s place.

Disability, discrimination in employment, duty to accommodate, Fitness to work, human rights code, human rights tribunal, Perron v Revera Long Term Care Inc., Return to work, undue hardship

Should employees talk about mental illness?

January 20, 2014 Meghan Ferguson Employee Relations, Health and Safety, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Training and Development, Union Relations

This month media campaigns are encouraging people to talk about mental illness. This raises the question about whether employees should talk to their employer about mental illness or remain silent for fear of losing their jobs.

accommodating a disability, canadian employment law, Disability, discipline, discrimination in employment, dismissal from jobs due to mental disability, duty to accommodate, employer is obligated to accommodate an employee with a disability up to the point of undue hardship, employment law, healthy workplace, human rights code, mental disabilities, mental health issues, performance reviews, undue hardship