Resources: Human Rights
-
Non-Culpable or Innocent Absenteeism?
February 2017
In the recent arbitration decision of Vancouver Coastal Health Authority v. Hospital Employees’ Union, Arbitrator John Sanderson, Q.C. upheld a grievor’s dismissal for non-culpable or innocent absenteeism because he failed to show he could attend at work regularly in the foreseeable future and the accommodation process was exhausted.
Read More +
-
Is This the New Standard For Family Status Discrimination?
February 2017
It is now accepted that “family status” protections under human rights legislation cover persons who are in a parent-child relationship, as well as the obligations which flow from that relationship, such as child or elder care.
Read More +
-
Labour Arbitration Preferred Over Human Rights Adjudication
January 2017
A recent decision out of Manitoba, Northern Regional Health Authority v. Manitoba (Human Rights Commission), 2016 MBQB 89, examines the overlapping jurisdiction between labour arbitration boards and human rights tribunals with respect to complaints of prohibited discrimination in employment.
Read More +
-
Discrimination Based On Religion In Not Hiring Unqualified Applicant
January 2017
On March 2, 2016, the BC Human Rights Tribunal issued the last of four decisions involving a complaint of discrimination against Amaruk Wilderness Corp. because it refused to hire the complainant, Bethany Paquette, as an assistant guide intern. Paquette alleged that she was denied employment on the basis of ancestry, religion and political belief. Her claim was brought against Amaruk and one of the company’s representatives.
Read More +
-
Yet Another Turn in the Saga of “Family Status” Discrimination
January 2017
Nothing worries clients more than to be told that the subject matter for which they require advice is “interesting”. Interesting is often a synonym for expensive. If that is the case, the issue of child and elder care in the context of human rights is likely to generate more expense in the coming year and beyond. The risks are made more common with an aging population and a workforce that requires busy people to juggle family commitments with work.
Read More +
-
Bartender Claims his Termination for Smoking Marijuana at Work was Discriminatory
September 2016
Darin Burton alleged that his employer, Tugboat Annie’s Pub (the “Employer”), discriminated against him on the ground of physical disability when he was discharged for smoking marijuana at the workplace. Burton claimed that the Employer had been aware since the outset of his employment that he used medical marijuana to deal with chronic pain from degenerative disk disease.
Read More +
-
Refusal of Work Not For Safety Reasons: Discharge For Just and Reasonable Cause Upheld
September 2016
In a recent decision, Arbitrator Lorne Slotnick upheld the discharge of an employee who attempted to improperly use medical restrictions and the right to refuse unsafe work under occupational health and safety legislation as the basis for refusing a work assignment.
Read More +
-
Just How Much Might Those Hurt Feelings Be Worth In British Columbia? BC Court of Appeal Weighs In
September 2016
The likelihood of parties in British Columbia coming to a mutually agreeable resolution of human rights disputes may have just become more unlikely as a result of the BC Court of Appeal’s recent decision in University of British Columbia v. Kelly, 2016 BCCA 271.
Read More +
-
Is it Discriminatory to Exclude Childless Employees From a Child-Focused Benefit Payment?
August 2016
In Nelson v. Bodwell High School (No. 2), 2016 BCHRT 75 a single, male teacher with no children claimed that he was discriminated against on the basis of his family status because he was not eligible for his employer’s Child Benefit Scheme (“CBS”). The CBS provided an annual payment of $1,200 per dependent child to each full time employee with at least one year of continuing service. Mr. Nelson did not have any children so he did not qualify for any payment under the CBS.
Read More +
-
BC Human Rights Tribunal Confirms Test For Family Status Discrimination
July 2016
In Kenworthy v. Brewers Distributor (No. 2), 2016 BCHRT 54 (“Kenworthy”), the BC Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) considered the issue of family status discrimination in the context of childcare obligations. Kenworthy is a helpful update on this tricky topic and is of particular interest due to the various approaches that courts and tribunals across Canada have adopted in defining “family status” obligations in human rights legislation.
Read More +