This document explains the legal backdrop for the Commission’s Policy Framework. It is divided into two main sections. The first provides an overview and summary of key legal principles from some significant legal decisions. This section aims to help readers understand the relevant legal background when seeking to conciliate or otherwise reconcile competing rights claims. The second part of the document surveys the leading cases that deal with competing rights. It also provides examples of situations where the leading cases, and the key principles from them, have been applied by courts and tribunals. It is divided by the types of rights conflicts that most commonly arise. The cases are discussed in some detail as the specific factual context of each case is so important to the rights reconciliation process.
The Code states that every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to employment without discrimination or harassment because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability.
The right to “equal treatment with respect to employment” covers every aspect of the workplace environment and employment relationship, including job applications, recruitment, training, transfers, promotions, apprenticeship terms, dismissal and layoffs. It also covers rate of pay, overtime, hours of work, holidays, benefits, shift work, discipline and performance evaluations.
Relevant policies and guides:
- Policy on removing the "Canadian experience" barrier
- Human rights at work 2008 - 3rd edition
- Guidelines on developing human rights policies and procedures
- Policy on employment-related medical information
- Policy on drug and alcohol testing
- Policy on requiring a drivers license as a condition of employment
- Human rights maturity model (Canadian Human Rights Commission)
June 21, 2011 - Please find attached a copy of a briefing note prepared by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) in the form requested by Ontario’s Ministry of Labour submitted to the Ministry for its input into Canada’s report on Convention 111 concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation as it pertains to the mandate of the OHRC.
On May 14, 2010, Ontario’s Divisional Court issued a decision on a case called Ontario Human Rights Commission v. Christian Horizons. The Divisional Court’s ruling was on the appeal of a 2008 decision made by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. In that decision, the Tribunal found that Christian Horizons infringed the rights of an employee who was in a same sex relationship.
Year of decision: 2010
In a decision on June 16, 2010, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario found that the Toronto Police Services Board discriminated against a new recruit, Ariyeh Krieger, by not accommodating his mental disability to the point of undue hardship.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (the OHRC) welcomes the opportunity to provide input into the independent mandatory review of the Accessibility for Ontarian’s with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA). The OHRC has a long history of engaging its broad mandate promoting and protecting the rights of persons with disabilities, including providing advice to government dating back to 1998 on the development of successive pieces accessibility legislation as well as more recent submissions on standards being developed under the AODA.
April 2006 - The settlement sets out the following commitments:
May 22, 2009 - The Commission recognizes the hard work of the Employment Accessibility Standards Development Committee in preparing the initial proposed Standard that sets out important requirements to help workplaces become fully accessible for applicants and employees with disabilities. The Commission’s submission details a number of issues for consideration by the Committee as it works to develop the final proposed standard.
May 22, 2009 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission believes this type of legislation, which includes requirements for employers to develop policies and programs, provide information, have regard for domestic violence, and take action, is very important for helping to protect and promote the human rights of individuals at work. While the Bill’s definition of “workplace violence” is restricted to “physical force” against a co-worker, the Commission is pleased to see provisions in the Bill addressing both violence and harassment, including a definition of harassment covering both unwelcome conduct and comment, consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code.
June 4, 2009 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission was concerned to learn this past week about broad police record checks being conducted on some jury pools. While this matter raises important issues around disclosure, impartiality, judicial fairness, privacy, and informed consent, there are also human rights implications for individuals with mental health disabilities under Ontario’s Human Rights Code.
As part of its commitment to employment equity, the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) agrees to undertake a number of initiatives that expand upon its efforts to date to promote barrier-free hiring and promotion, and equitable representation of designated groups at all levels of employment.