Human Rights Law – Discrimination during the Hiring Process and against Disabled and Female Employees
Human Rights Laws in Ontario
The human rights laws that govern Ontario employers are found within the Human Rights Code. Ontario employers must comply with the Human Rights Code (Code) which prohibits discrimination in employment on 14 grounds including: race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status, or disability. (a Prohibited Ground)
In our experience, most human rights issues arise during the hiring process or relate to disabled employees or female employees. In this blog, we will address these three issues.
- Discriminating in the hiring process
The Code prohibits discrimination in employment on a Prohibited Ground, and states that an infringement occurs where, among other things, a job application directly or indirectly classifies on a Prohibited Ground.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (the Commission) has published at least four policies that are relevant to hiring; namely
– Policy on employment-related medical information
– Policy on drug and alcohol testing
– Policy on requiring a driver’s license as a condition of employment
– Policy on height and weight requirements
- Discriminating against disabled employees
The Code prohibits discrimination in employment because of disability unless the person is incapable of performing or fulfilling the essential job duties. A person cannot be found incapable unless accommodating the person would cause the employer undue hardship
The Commission has published a 40-page document entitled “Policy and Guidelines on disability and the duty to accommodate”.
- Discriminating against female employees
The Code prohibits discrimination in employment because of sex which includes the right to equal treatment because a woman is (or may become) pregnant, and the right not to be sexually harassed.
The Commission has published a 32-page document entitled “Policy on discrimination because of pregnancy and breastfeeding”, and a 37-page Guideline on developing human rights policies and procedures
Lessons to be Learned
- Generally, when making employment decisions, it should not matter to an employer whether an employee is: male or female; heterosexual or homosexual; white or of colour; married or single; Canadian or another nationality; or, disabled or able-bodied. Taking one of these grounds into account when making an employment decision is generally a violation of the Code.
- Generally, an employer should not ask whether an employee is disabled or speculate as to whether accommodation measures are needed. The onus is generally on the employee to disclose a disability and to identify any accommodation measures that are required.
- Although not required by law, we recommend that most employers introduce a human rights policy which defines sexual harassment and includes a internal complaint process
- The Policies and Guidelines published by the Commission do not have the force of law, however, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario can and does consider Commission policies at human rights hearings. We believe that certain Commission policies and guidelines interpret the Code too broadly.
If you have any questions about human rights in the workplace, please call us at 1-888-640-1728 or send an email to [email protected].
The material and information in this blog and this website are for general information only. They should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information referred to in this blog or its links. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog. Readers should obtain appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or the MacLeod Law Firm.
Recent Posts
Doug’s Top 5 Employment Law Stories of 2022
Here are my top 5 employment law stories for 2022: 1. COVID 19 - Temporary Layoffs This issue remains my number one story because this issue impacts so many court cases. Some judges have concluded that a temporary layoff set out in the Infectious Disease Emergency...
Reducing Litigation Risk
In a recent case, Pohl v. Hudson’s Bay Company, 2022 ONSC 5230 (CanLII),an employer was ordered to pay a long service employee the equivalent of about 3 years pay and contribute about $ 35 000 to his legal fees. Although this was a without cause termination case, it...
Employment Law Update: Electronic Monitoring Policy
A new amendment to the Employment Standards Act requires employers with 25 or more employees on January 1st of a given year to put in place a written policy regarding any electronic monitoring processes they use to monitor employees. The deadline for 2022 is October...