In a helpful decision for employers, Pourasadi v. Bentley Leathers, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) found that an employer’s duty to accommodate did not extend to altering the essential duties of a position. In this case, the Applicant, a retail store manager, requested a workplace accommodation for a wrist injury which prevented her…
Search Results for: Human Design или Дизайн Человека Дизайн Человека это универсальный язык описания реальности консультации онлайн http://instagram.com/batmanapollo
159 Results
Supreme Court of Canada On Pregnancy and Parental Leave Top-Ups
The Supreme Court of Canada recently upheld a decision of a British Columbia arbitrator which had found that denying birth mothers entitlement to parental supplemental employment (“SEB” or “top-up”) benefits where they had received pregnancy SEB plan benefits was discriminatory. The issue before the arbitrator turned on an interpretation of the collective agreement in place…
City Did Not Breach Duty to Accommodate When it Declined Firefighters’ Request for Exception to Mandatory Retirement Policy
In a recent decision, Corrigan v. Corporation of the City of Mississauga [1], the Divisional Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “Tribunal”), which found that the City of Mississauga did not breach its procedural duty to accommodate when it declined to accommodate suppression…
Maintaining a Workplace Free of Sexual Harassment
Over the past several months, the issue of workplace sexual harassment has been in the spotlight and the subject of considerable discussion. In response to recent media attention, the Ontario Human Rights Commission recently issued a statement reiterating the legal duty of employers to prevent sexual harassment and to respond to any complaints in the…
After Keewatin: The Use of Exclusions
Overview In a recent case, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario served clear notice that excluding a student under s. 265(m) of the Education Act, because of behavioural issues arising from the student’s disability, must not offend human rights principles. In R.B. v. Keewatin Patricia District School Board, the Tribunal found that the exclusion of…
Human Rights Update 2014: Accommodation and the Diverse Workforce
Materials Case Law Summaries PowerPoint Presentation Slides Agenda As the workforce in Ontario has become increasingly diverse, the range and complexity of accommodation issues facing Ontario employers have also grown substantially. Keeping up with the continually-evolving legal landscape with respect to accommodation issues can be a challenge for many busy Corporate Counsel and Human Resources…
Reaching Out – Seventh Edition
Dear Friends, Welcome to the Fall Edition of Reaching Out. As we fall back an hour, we want to make sure that you do not feel like you are “falling back” in terms of current issues in labour and employment law that may affect your workplaces. In that regard, we have a full docket of…
HRTO Decision Granting Significant Remedies Upheld on Appeal
The Divisional Court has upheld a decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in which the Tribunal ordered significant damages against the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board and also ordered reinstatement of an employee after an almost decade-long absence from the workplace. The Court agreed with the applicant’s submission that “the goal of the remedial provisions of the Code ought not to…
Reaching Out – Sixth Edition
Dear Friends, With summer heating up, burning human resources issues continue to smolder as well. At Hicks Morley, we hope that you are enjoying the summer sunshine and we welcome you to the Summer 2014 Edition of Reaching Out, designed to address a number of relevant practical issues of particular interest and application to management…
Employer Permitted to Define “Spouse” under Benefit Plan to Exclude Married but Separated Spouses
In a recent decision of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) in VanderLinde v. Oshawa (City) (“VanderLinde”), the Tribunal found that it is not discriminatory for an employer to require that an employee’s legally married spouse be living with the employee as a condition of eligibility as a spouse under its group benefit plan. In…