human rights applications

HRTO confirms co-op student’s right to pursue interests

April 23, 2018 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights, Uncategorized

Co-op students may be covered by the “Code”, and should be afforded the same inalienable rights as all other employees during a potential interview or co-op placement.

2 C.H.R.R. D/487, 2005 HRTO 53, 2011 HRTO 1724, applicant’s injury to dignity, Browning v. Northend Body Shop Ltd.2017 HRTO 1001, co-op students, discrimination, employer vicarious liablility, employment law, Faryna v. Chorny, feelings and self-respect, Hartling v. Timmins Board of Police Commissioners (1981), hrto, human rights applications, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Kevin Sambrano, Ontario Human Rights Code, Sanford v. Koop, sex, the Code, vicariously liability, Whale v. Keele North Recycling

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario: the “Code” matters, not social norms

March 26, 2018 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Human Resources, Human Rights

Although there may be social norms at play, a business owner would do well to continue to update and implement workplace and human rights policies on an ongoing basis, otherwise, they may be liable for any breach of the “Code”, whether intended or otherwise.

discrimination, employment law, George v. 1735475 Ontario Limited, harrassment, hrto, human rights applications, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Kevin Sambrano, Ministry of Labour, nigglet, personal respondent, poisoned work environments, social norms, workplace harassment

No reason given for refusal of HRTO request to expedite, no reasons required

February 26, 2018 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, Human Resources, Human Rights

In this matter, the Request to Expedite was dismissed through a letter from the Registrar. In the interim decision, the Tribunal further explained that in matters dealing with process, there are no grounds for reconsideration, as only final orders may be reconsidered.

discrimination, discrimination in services, employment law, expedited hearings, Fish v. national Steel Car Litd., harrassment, hrto, human rights applications, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decison, interim decisons, Kevin Sambrano, procedural fairness, reprisal, Request to Expedite, Rule 21, Rules of Procedure, the Code, Toronto Paralegal