In light of the upcoming legalization of recreational cannabis, it is critical that employers review all current policies to determine whether revisions are required. In this video, Jacqueline Luksha reviews key features of a Drug and Alcohol policy related to cannabis in the workplace. She also discusses the importance of training regarding cannabis use, and touches on policies dealing with accommodation requests.
To understand the potential impact of cannabis on the workplace, employers should be aware of prohibitions and obligations under the applicable statutes. In this video, Jacqui Luksha describes the statutory framework in Ontario related to cannabis – touching on the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Federal Cannabis Act, the Ontario Cannabis Act, the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017, the Human Rights Code, Occupational Health and Safety Act, and the Highway Traffic Act.
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.
The recent decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) in Talos v. Grand Erie District School Board raises important issues about the provision of benefits to employees aged 65 and older. In Talos, the Tribunal found that section 25 (2.1) of the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code), which effectively permits employers to cease providing employees with benefits at age 65, is unconstitutional. More specifically, the Tribunal held that this age-based “carve out” from Code protection violates the equality guarantee under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) and cannot be justified under section 1 of the Charter as a reasonable limit.
This Guide provides American employers with an introduction to employment laws and regulations that affect businesses in Canada. It outlines an overview of the main differences between Canadian and U.S. workplace laws.
As we previously reported, the Ontario Anti -Racism Act (ARA) came into force on June 1, 2017. One of the purposes behind the ARA is to allow certain organizations to collect information that will be used to identify and monitor systematic racism and racial disparities for the purpose of eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial…
In Aitchison v L & L Painting and Decorating Ltd., the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) found that an employer did not discriminate against the applicant when his employment was terminated for smoking marijuana while at work, which was contrary to the employer’s “zero tolerance” policy. The applicant was employed as a seasonal painter…
In City of Toronto v. Josephs, the Divisional Court reviewed a recent decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) and specifically addressed the question of a service provider’s liability for harassment issues arising between customers. In so doing, the Court has provided useful guidance for organizations that provide services to the public, and…
In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Canada held that workplace discrimination can be perpetrated by someone other than the complainant’s employer or superior. Accordingly, employers should be aware that they may be responsible for discrimination against workers who are not their employees, where a “sufficient nexus” exists between a complainant and a respondent in the employment context. Learn more in this FTR Now.