human rights

Subscribe to human rights via RSS

Business is becoming increasingly global as companies establish operations in various countries throughout the world. As profitable as this strategy may be, expansion is not without its difficulties. Where an employer is a subsidiary or branch of a larger foreign corporation, for instance, there may be issues regarding conflicting laws and regulations. For example, where a parent company is expected to abide by one set of laws in the United States, but adherence to those laws may be viewed as discriminatory in Canada, what is the appropriate course of action for a Canadian subsidiary or branch?

On July 23, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) released its decision in Quebec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) v. Bombardier Inc. The case was the SCC’s first opportunity to consider alleged discrimination based on foreign laws.
Continue Reading Acting Locally, Thinking Globally: The Impact of Foreign Laws on Canadian Employers

Most employers are familiar with the prohibitions against discrimination that exist in human rights legislation throughout Canada.  At the centre of the legislative web are protections for employees with disabilities which includes the right to equal treatment in employment.

But what about employees who do not suffer from disabling conditions and are simply predisposed to serious, or life-threatening, conditions? Where do they fit into the legal framework? What protections, if any, do they have in the workplace? What rights, if any, do employers have to know about their genetic vulnerabilities? In short, how do genetic markers and family medical history impact the employment relationship?

These are questions that our human rights laws will be forced to grapple with, and the outcome of ongoing debate about “genetic discrimination” is likely to impact employers across the country. While hard and fast answers for are not yet entirely clear, employers should be aware of the differing viewpoints and potential ramifications.
Continue Reading It’s All in the Genes: Genetic Discrimination in the Canadian Workplace

Our regular readers may recall our previous post regarding the case of Attorney General of Canada v. Johnstone, in which the Federal Court of Appeal established a new test for determining whether an employer has discriminated against an employee on the basis of “family status.” In the recently-released Partridge v. Botony Dental Corporation, 2015 ONSC 343, the Ontario Superior Court adopted the Johnstone test in the context of Ontario’s Human Rights Code and awarded the plaintiff $20,000 in human rights damages.
Continue Reading Ontario Court Adopts Federal Test for Family Status Discrimination

It is no secret that social media platforms are changing the way we communicate, the way we inform ourselves, and the way we do business.  In fact, the growth of these platforms has been nothing short of phenomenal.

However, social media has also created new challenges for employers.  To assist you with these new challenges, we draw your attention to two recent cases.
Continue Reading “Unfriend Me”: Social Media, Discipline and Discharge

In Attorney General of Canada v Johnstone, 2014 FCA 110, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) established a new test for determining whether an employer has discriminated against an employee on the basis of “family status” under the Canadian Human Rights Act (“CHRA”).

Continue Reading Federal Court of Appeal: Your Kid’s Hockey Tournament is Not Protected Under the Canadian Human Rights Act

A team of Baker & McKenzie lawyers successfully argued for the summary dismissal of a human rights application to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. The applicant in this case alleged discrimination on the basis of disability under s. 11 of the Ontario Human Rights Code (“Code”).
Continue Reading Successful Dismissal of a Human Rights Application in the Academic Context by Baker & McKenzie