The January 1, 2014 deadline to comply with a number of standards in the Integrated Accessibility Standards regulation (the “IAS Regulation”) under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (the “AODA”) is fast approaching for many organizations. In this FTR Now, we provide a brief overview of some key obligations required by that date….
Practice Area: Human Rights
Application of “Family Status” Considered by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Canadian human rights tribunals have, of late, been rendering decisions which examine the reach of “family status” as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Recently, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) examined a case that involved eldercare responsibilities the applicant had for his mother-in-law. It found that the eligibility rules of the employer’s Relocation Directive…
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Extends “Family Status” Protection to Care for Mother-in-Law
In a recent decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”), Hicks v. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, the Tribunal found that “family status” protection under the Canadian Human Rights Act (the “Act”) can extend to eldercare responsibilities for “in-laws.” The Complainant was employed by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (“HRSDC”) when…
School Board Client Update
The following represents a few notable decisions made by the Ontario Labour Relations Board, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and arbitrators in 2013 that are relevant to school boards in Ontario. FACEBOOK POSTING BY TEACHER WARRANTS DISCIPLINE In Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation and Simcoe County District School Board, 2013 CanLII 62014 (CanLII), the…
Section 46.1 Code Damages Awarded by Court
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently awarded damages under section 46.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, a section added to the Code in 2008 to permit courts to award damages for violations of the Code. Wilson v. Solis Mexican Foods appears to be the first decision in which such damages have been ordered…
Ontario Court Awards Damages under Human Rights Code
In what appears to be the first decision under s. 46.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code (“Code”), which permits courts to award damages for violations of Code rights, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has awarded damages for infringement of Code rights in an amount of $20,000. (Prior to the changes enacted to the…
Mandatory Retirement Upheld for Suppression Fire Fighters: HRTO Clarifies Accommodation Obligations
In its recent decision, Corrigan v. Mississauga (City), the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) considered whether a municipal employer had a positive obligation to consider requests for individual exceptions to the mandatory retirement policy of age 60 for suppression fire fighters and to work with those fire fighters to develop a medical fitness testing…
OHRC Develops Policy on Removing the “Canadian Experience” Barrier for Job Applicants
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (“OHRC”) recently posted a new policy directive entitled “Policy on Removing the “Canadian experience” barrier” which sets out the Commission’s position as follows: . . . a strict requirement for “Canadian experience” is prima facie discrimination (discrimination on its face) and can only be used in very limited circumstances. The…
Canadian Human Rights Act Amended to Delete Discriminatory Practice Relating to “Hate Messages”
On June 26, 2013, a federal private member’s Bill, Bill C-304, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting freedom), received Royal Assent. Bill C-304 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act (“Act”) by repealing section 13 “Hate Messages” as a discriminatory practice, to ensure compliance with the freedom of expression guarantee in the…
Significant decision on establishing “prima facie discrimination” rendered by the Court of Appeal for Ontario
The Court of Appeal for Ontario has rendered a significant decision in Peel Law Association v. Pieters regarding the test for establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. The Court upheld a finding of the HRTO that race and colour were factors in the questioning by a librarian of three applicants (two lawyers and a…