I find it amazing what we, as human beings, have had to do in the last week to adapt to the realities of living with COVID-19. I am so impressed, for example, by how some small businesses have been able to quickly change how they deliver their goods and services so that they can survive and how customers have embraced and supported this. I am equally impressed that office employees have rolled up their sleeves and found new ways to communicate with one another to “get the job done” and that offices with hundreds of workers are able to operate remotely.
A recent decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) has created further confusion on the duty to accommodate as it relates to discrimination on the basis of family status. Family Status – A (brief) History Historically, there have been multiple (and conflicting) lines of cases on the test to be applied in cases
We hope that most employers are familiar with their substantive obligations under the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “OHRC”). However, I have found that employers can overlook a “hidden” provision in the OHRC which imposes liability on them not only for the discriminatory actions of their controlling minds and/or senior employees, but also for those
Mastering the ins and outs of the duty to accommodate under human rights legislation is hard. In fact, some would go so far as to say impossible. It’s no wonder this topic has floated to the top of the list of challenges faced by HR practitioners. I’ve given this some thought and come up with