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.
Tag: Human Rights Code
Workplace Law in Canada: A Primer
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.
Ontario’s Proposed New Anti-Racism Standards
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…
HRTO Finds No Discrimination Where Use of Medical Marijuana at Worksite Breached Zero Tolerance Policy
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…
Are Service Providers Liable for Harassment Between Customers? The Divisional Court Weighs In
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…
Ontario Human Rights Commission Releases New Policies on Drug and Alcohol Testing and Ableism and Discrimination Based on Disability
The Ontario Human Rights Commission has published updated guidelines on these critical issues – and what it thinks your organization should be doing…
FTR Quarterly – 2016, Issue 2
In this issue: “Bad Customer Service” – or Breach of Human Rights Legislation?” and “Lifecycle of a Rental Tenancy: Human Rights Code Considerations and Best Practices for Compliance”
Lifecycle of a Rental Tenancy: Human Rights Code Considerations and Best Practices for Compliance
Landlords and rental housing providers must contend with some complex obligations and challenges under the Ontario Human Rights Code. These apply throughout the rental process – from advertising a vacancy, to choosing a tenant, to terminating a tenancy. Adherence to some best practices and guidelines can help ensure compliance at every stage.
“Bad Customer Service” – or Breach of Human Rights Legislation?
Service-based organizations – such as restaurants – have obligations to their customers under human rights legislation. But how far do these obligations go? Two recent cases help to define the line.
Reaching Out – Eleventh Edition
In this Issue: The Human Rights Tribunal rules that a man’s goatee is not protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code, WSIB and Mental Stress Claims and more…