Resources: Human Rights

Paid COVID-19 Leave Now, and Paid Sick Leave in 2022

Bill 13 Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2021 (“Bill 13”) received Royal Assent on May 20, 2021. Bill 13 is an amendment to the British Columbia Employment Standards Act (the “ESA”) and does two things:

Read More +

Bill 30, Employment Standards (Serious Illness or Injury Leave) Amendment Act: BC Government Proposes 27-Week Serious Illness or Injury Leave for Employees

On October 20, 2025, the BC Legislature introduced Bill 30, Employment Standards (Serious Illness or Injury Leave) Amendment Act. If passed, Bill 30 will amend the Employment Standards Act (the “ESA”) to provide employees with up to 27 weeks of unpaid leave within a 52-week period due to serious illness or injury (the “Serious Illness or Injury Leave”).

Read More +

Unreasonable Conduct Before the Tribunal Can Result in Costs

This decision concerns judicial review of a costs award by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, under section 37(4) of the B.C. Human Rights Code.

Read More +

Workplace Psychological Claims – BC Supreme Court Narrows the “Labour Relations Exclusion”

On March 6, 2025, the BC Supreme Court released an important and lengthy decision regarding workplace psychological claims. This trial decision addresses the second part of James Pickering’s action for benefits under the Workers Compensation Act, R.S.B.C. 2019, c. 1 [WCA].  The first part of this proceeding, indexed as Pickering v. School District No. 38 (Richmond), 2021 BCSC 1497, was a judicial review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (“WCAT”).

At trial, Mr. Pickering argued that two provisions of the WCA infringe his rights under s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11 [Charter]. He said that those provisions, in combination, led to the denial of his mental disorder claim for workers’ compensation. In short, he argued that his claim was denied for reasons that are discriminatory.

Read More +

Privacy Versus Public Interest: Anonymity at the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal

In the case of Ng v. City of Vancouver (No. 2), 2024 BCHRT 228, Giana Ng filed a complaint with the Tribunal and alleged discrimination on the basis of mental disability in the course of her employment.

She applied under Rule 5 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure to limit the publication of her personal identifying information in any written Tribunal decision and also to redact her personal information from any part of her file that could be made available to the public.

The City of Vancouver (the “City”) opposed the application.  It argued that Ng’s privacy interests did not outweigh the public interest in the Tribunal’s proceedings.

Read More +

Employer Dismisses Pregnant Employee Based on Facebook Post: Ontario Human Rights Tribunal Awards $37,849 to Complainant

In Iskander v. 2363327 Ontario Incorporated and Primeau, 2024 HRTO 1122, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal allowed a complaint alleging prohibited discrimination in employment on the basis of sex, including pregnancy and sexual harassment.  The complainant, Kristina Iskander, testified that she believed she was dismissed from employment because she was pregnant.  The Tribunal found the respondents to have breached the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990 c. H. 19 (the “Code”) and awarded $37,849 to the complainant.

Read More +

Grasping at Straws: Claiming Discrimination in the Face of Clear Misconduct

In Bartender v. Finale Entertainment Inc., 2024 BCHRT 155, the complainant, a former bartender with the respondent nightclub, filed a human rights complaint after his employment was terminated without cause.

The complainant, who identified as Caucasian or white, alleged that his employment was terminated in order to hire a Chinese employee.  To support his allegation of discrimination, the complainant relied on the fact that, on the same day the respondent terminated his employment, a Chinese worker started working in his place.

Read More +

Toxic Work Environment and Investigation of Concern? That Still Might Not Be Enough to Warrant a Discrimination Claim

In Thomas v. Signals Design Group, 2024 BCHRT 135, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal dismissed a complaint alleging discrimination on the basis of sex. The complainant alleged she received radically different treatment as compared to her male counterparts and had to resign from employment because of the toxic work environment.

Read More +

Health Spending Accounts Not Sufficient to Meet ESA Sick Leave Requirements

A British Columbia arbitral decision is the most recent in a developing line of authority cautioning BC employers that sick days conferred under the Employment Standards Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 113 (the “ESA”) may be qualitatively different than sick leave benefits under a collective agreement.

Read More +

Good Accommodation Gone Wrong

In United Nurses of Alberta v. Alberta Health Services (MacKinnon Grievance), [2023] A.G.A.A. No. 10 (Asbell), the majority of an arbitration board awarded $10,000 in injury to dignity (human rights) damages for an employer’s failure to consistently and proactively accommodate a neurodivergent employee.

Read More +