Sambrano Paralegal► Resource Blog

Home » Posts tagged 'Ontario Human Rights Tribunal'

Tag Archives: Ontario Human Rights Tribunal

The duty to accommodate revisited: H.T. v. ES Holdings Inc. o/a Country Herbs

Free stock photos employment law human right paralegalThe duty to accommodate presents itself to employers in many forms. While the most common accommodation involves a disability, often there are other grounds for accommodation that an employer must address as illustrated (more…)

Maciel vs. Fashion Coiffures: pregnancy and employer’s continued obligation under the “Code”

Human Rights Employment Law Sambrano

The applicant, Jessica Maciel, was just over four months pregnant when she applied for, and was hired as a receptionist by the respondents, Fashion Coiffures Ltd. and Crystal Coiffures Ltd.. (more…)

Sex based discrimination and poisoned work environment

Sambrano Human rightsDoes an employee have to be “sexually” harassed in order for there to be a breach of the Human Rights Code (“Code”)? This issue was determined in Hill v. Intersteam Technologies Inc., a recent decision from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

Background

The applicant, Kelly Hill, worked in a small workplace. She was employed with the corporate respondent, Intersteam Technologies Inc., for only a short period of time from May of 2013 until November 2013. (more…)

Family status under the Code: Recent developments

Sambrano Human rights marital statusThe seminal cases dealing with discrimination based on family status more often than not address the issue of caregiving. See: Family status: Recent interpretation under the Human Rights Code. See: Employee not discriminated against as breastfeeding a “choice”- Federal Court of Appeal Decision. In the recent case, Knox-Heldmann v. 1818224 Ontario Limited o/a Country Style Donut, the Tribunal demonstrates that discrimination based on family status is not restricted to caregiving. (more…)

Tribunal orders pharmacy to pay $8,000.00 as a result of racial profiling

sambrano legal racial profilingUnder section 46.3 (1) of Ontario’s Human Rights Code, an employer may be vicariously liable for the discriminatory acts of their employees. Such was the case in the recent Human Rights Tribunal decision of McCarthy v. Kenny Tan Pharmacy Inc.. [i]

Simply put, an organization is responsible for discrimination that occurs through the acts of its employees or agents, whether or not it had any knowledge of, participation in or control over these actions.[ii][iii] (more…)

Workplace religious accommodation: A two-part obligation under human rights

scales-159031Under the Human Rights Code (Ontario), the duty to accommodate in the workplace is a two-part obligation. Employers who do not make at least a reasonable effort to comply with this obligation can find themselves having to pay a financial price. This was the reality in Qureshi v. G4S Security Services, 2009.

Facts of the case

The applicant, Muhammad Quersih, a male of Muslim Faith, was being considered for a security guard position. (more…)

No “give and take” required by employee in accommodation under the Human Rights Code

Toronto human rights advocate human rightsThe applicant, Michele Macan, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to employment due to disability. The respondent, Stongco Limited Partnership, rejected the allegations, instead submitting that the applicant’s disability was “not a reason, a factor, or even considered in its decision to terminate the applicant”.[1]

The respondent alleged that her termination was a result of a restructuring within the applicant’s department. The hearing was held over the course of 3 days.

Background

Prior to the applicant being hired, the applicant had been diagnosed with a chronic medical condition which required frequent time off from work. At the time of her termination, the applicant had worked (more…)

%d bloggers like this: