Globe and Mail: “It’s comparable to what you can get in civil court but with a lot less hassle,” Ms. Grace said in an interview. ”I think the standard to which applicants are held is probably an easier one. It’s easier to prove your case in that forum. They don’t enforce the rules of evidence as strictly. It’s a kinder arena in which to litigate. It’s gentler on the claimants overall. You’re not put through the wringer to the same extent – the cross examinations are not as rigorous.”
The size of the awards attracted her attention.
Category Archives: OHRC
ACC – Keep an open mind when determining which relationships are covered by family status protection. For example, the Ontario Human Rights Code defines family status as “the status of being in a parent and child relationship.” This definition however, has been liberally interpreted by both courts and tribunals to include most parent and child “type” relationships including non-biological parent and child relationships and non-biological gay and lesbian parents. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has also taken the position that family status protection extends to individuals providing eldercare to aging parents. Given the aging population, employers should prepare for family status accommodation requests from employees who are looking after older parents with special needs.
Toronto Sun – She is helping friend, Ray Nemard, 40, in his bid to obtain an apology from the commission after he was allegedly called a “f****** monkey,” by an operator at Coxwell subway station in 2004.
A complaint was filed to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, which is hearing his case.
“I am not happy by what I heard today,” Nemard said after the meeting. “The operator who did this to me is still on the job even though we know he has 16 complaints against him.”
He takes “pills and other medication” to help him cope with the slur, which he said led to a loss of his job as a chef.
Metro – Canadian employers have historically taken an ignorant view of human rights tribunals and their often extraordinary decisions. But that may be quickly changing.
Sweeping changes to human rights legislation and left-leaning adjudicators directed to interpret remedial legislation — such as human rights laws — in a broad and inclusive manner, should leave employers very concerned. Here are some of the reasons why…
Vancouver Sun – Female high school athletes in Ontario will have the opportunity to crack the roster of boys’ teams next year after amendments were made to a provincewide policy following a human rights complaint.
The Ontario Federation of School Athletic Associations (OFSAA) said it will allow girls to try out for boys’ teams after Courtney Greer, a Grade 11 soccer player from Waterloo, Ont., a filed formal complaint.
Your Ottawa Region – Update: The respondents have agreed with the suspension of proceedings. The case is now closed.
The human rights violation claim against Mayor Terry Gibeau and the Town of Arnprior was dropped suddenly April 12.
Applicants Igor (Alex) Winter and James (Ron) MacIntyre contacted the Ontario Human Rights Commission to have the claim dismissed after nine days of hearings. The final two days were to take place early next week at the Best Western hotel, on Carling Avenue in Ottawa.
Repeated requests for interviews went unanswered by Winter, MacIntrye and their lawyer, Gordon Douglas of Gowlings Lafleur Henderson in Ottawa…Tribunal vice-chairman David A. Wright, who was presiding over the hearing, also refused comment.
From the Tribunal’s “Core Values” section:
Transparency: Tribunal procedures will be clearly established and decisions will be made in an open way, with substantive reasons that are clear, concise and understandable.
Globe and Mail – Environmental sensitivity is listed as a disability in Ontario’s Human Rights Code, which means that employers have a duty to accommodate the needs of the environmentally sensitive in the workplace.
However the rule doesn’t specifically address scent sensitivities as a disability, says Pascale Demers, spokesperson for the Ontario Human Rights Commission.
The commission has only ever received two complaints from employees about scent sensitivity. Both were settled privately, and the commission has no information about what was decided, Ms. Demers says.