In a recent edition of FTR Now, we reported on two significant Federal Court decisions, Johnstone v. Canada and Seeley v. Canadian National Railway, which confirmed that employers have an obligation to accommodate their employees’ childcare needs. Since the date that FTR Now was published, these two decisions have continued to generate a considerable amount…
Tag: Accommodation
George Vuicic Quoted in The Lawyers Weekly
Hicks Morley’s George Vuicic was quoted in the February 22, 2013 edition of The Lawyers Weekly in an article entitled, “Fed Court rejects strict test for ‘family status’ claims.” The article discusses two recent cases by the Federal Court which has affirmed that employers may be obliged to adjust their work demands in order to…
Federal Court Affirms Employer’s Obligation to Accommodate Childcare Needs
The Federal Court of Canada has upheld the finding of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) that “family status” under the Canadian Human Rights Act (“CHRA”) includes a parent’s obligations to care for a child, and that an employer is obligated to provide accommodation for an employee’s childcare needs. This decision is the latest in…
Accommodation and the Special Needs Child: The Supreme Court of Canada Decision in Moore
The Supreme Court of Canada has released an important decision which reaffirms some of the key principles in the accommodation process. The issues in Moore v. British Columbia (Education) arose from the financial choice made by a British Columbia School District in the provision of services. The Court’s criticism of the failure of that District…
Michael Hines Quoted in Hamilton Spectator Newspaper
Hicks Morley’s Michael Hines was quoted in the May 10, 2011 edition of the Hamilton Spectator newspaper. In an article entitled “No laws broken in excluding Westmount and Saltfleet from accommodation review,” Michael commented on the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board’s exclusion of Westmount and Saltfleet Secondary Schools from its current student accommodation review process. View…
Religious Accommodation: Tribunal Finds Two Paid Days of Religious Leave Not Required
INTRODUCTION On September 3, 2008, Vice-Chair Sherry Liang of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario issued a very helpful decision in Markovic v. Autocom Manufacturing Ltd., 2008 HRTO 64. The Autocom decision provides some much-needed clarification concerning the accommodation of religious observances. Of particular interest, the Tribunal rejected the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s long-held policy…
The Hydro-Québec Decision: Restoring Balance to the Accommodation Analysis
INTRODUCTION Following on the heels of its recent decisions in McGill University Health Centre and Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays, the Supreme Court of Canada has issued yet another helpful decision dealing with the employer’s duty to accommodate. In Hydro-Québec v. Syndicat des employé-e-s de techniques professionnelles et de bureau d’Hydro-Québec, section locale 2000 (SCFP-FTQ),…