Employers and human resource professionals will undoubtedly remember 2022 as another year shaped by the pandemic.
But…there were also legal developments in 2022 that were not related to COVID-19. In this FTR Now, we look at some of the past year’s notable “non-pandemic” cases and legislative developments.
In Ontario (Health) v. Association of Ontario Midwives, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ministry), upholding the finding of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) that the Ministry engaged in gender discrimination in compensation setting practices for midwives. In this Case in Point,…
On July 10, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision in Reference re Genetic Non‑Discrimination Act, upholding the constitutionality of the impugned sections of the federal Genetic Non-Discrimination Act (Act) in a split decision. The constitutional question was raised in a reference by the Quebec government to the Quebec Court of Appeal, which…
In its recent decision Ontario v Association of Ontario Midwives, the Ontario Divisional Court upheld two decisions of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario pertaining to sex discrimination and pay equity, reaffirming that employers have an obligation to take proactive steps to ensure that sex-segregated workers are compensated free from sex discrimination and that a…
In Association of Ontario Midwives v. Ontario (Health and Long-Term Care), the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) affirmed that those who set compensation rates may be required to take proactive steps to ensure that sex-segregated workers are compensated in a way that is free of sex-based discrimination. It ordered, among other things, that the…
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (Tribunal) recently held that the decision to provide reduced benefits to employees over age 65 under an employer-sponsored benefit plan is not discrimination under the British Columbia Human Rights Code (Code) if the reduced benefits are provided as part of a “bona fide group or employee insurance plan” within…
The Ontario Divisional Court recently released Carter v. FCA Canada Inc and Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, a decision which affirms that differential treatment between employees with work-related injuries and employees with non-work-related injuries is not discriminatory under the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code). The applicant, who had a non-work-related injury, sought to return to…
The British Columbia Court of Appeal recently clarified the meaning and scope of the term “family status” in Envirocon Environmental Services, ULC v. Suen. This case confirmed the Campbell River test, which imposes a higher standard for establishing discrimination than the often-cited Federal Court of Appeal test in Johnstone, adding to the “family status” interpretation…
The summer 2018 edition of the Canadian Association for the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment in Higher Education (CAPDHHE)’s newsletter features an article authored by Hicks Morley lawyer Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell.
In a recent decision released by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the Tribunal found that an employer discriminated against a potential employee on the basis of citizenship when it required proof of eligibility to work in Canada on a permanent basis as a condition of employment.
