2,734
edits
Difference between revisions of "Employment Law Issues (9:V)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Employment Law Issues (9:V) (view source)
Revision as of 21:47, 27 September 2022
, 21:47, 27 September 2022→1. Discrimination in Employment
| Line 1,104: | Line 1,104: | ||
*The person complains or is named in a complaint, gives evidence, or otherwise assists in a complaint or other proceeding under the ''HRC'' | *The person complains or is named in a complaint, gives evidence, or otherwise assists in a complaint or other proceeding under the ''HRC'' | ||
This prohibition against discrimination in employment includes discrimination in the hiring process, in the terms and conditions of employment, and in decisions to terminate employment. Employment agencies also must not refuse to refer a person for employment based on one of the prohibited grounds for discrimination. Trade unions, employer’s organizations, and occupational associations cannot discriminate against people by excluding, expelling or suspending them from membership (s 14). | This prohibition against discrimination in employment includes discrimination in the hiring process, in the terms and conditions of employment, and in decisions to terminate employment. Employment agencies also must not refuse to refer a person for employment based on one of the prohibited grounds for discrimination. Trade unions, employer’s organizations, and occupational associations cannot discriminate against people by excluding, expelling or suspending them from membership (''HRC'' s 14). | ||
There must be no discrimination in wages paid (s 12). Men and women must receive equal pay for similar or substantially similar work. Similarity is to be determined having regard to the skill, effort, and responsibility required by a job. | There must be no discrimination in wages paid (''HRC'' s 12). Men and women must receive equal pay for similar or substantially similar work. Similarity is to be determined having regard to the skill, effort, and responsibility required by a job. | ||
Family status protection includes childcare and family obligations. See Johnstone v Canada Border Services, 2010 CHRT 20, https://canlii.ca/t/2cs2j. In Harvey v Gibraltar Mines Ltd. (No. 2), 2020 BCHRT 193, https://canlii.ca/t/jbnsk, the BCHRT determined that the requirement to show a change in working conditions may not be necessary to demonstrate discrimination based on family status. | Family status protection includes childcare and family obligations. See Johnstone v Canada Border Services, 2010 CHRT 20, https://canlii.ca/t/2cs2j. In Harvey v Gibraltar Mines Ltd. (No. 2), 2020 BCHRT 193, https://canlii.ca/t/jbnsk, the BCHRT determined that the requirement to show a change in working conditions may not be necessary to demonstrate discrimination based on family status. | ||
| Line 1,116: | Line 1,116: | ||
For more information about each of the prohibited grounds, see [[BC Human Rights Code (6:III)#B. Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination | Chapter 6: Human Rights, Section III.B: Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination]]. See also “Recent Human Rights Cases of Interest for Employment Lawyers”, Michael A. Watt, Employment Law Conference 2014, Paper 4.1, CLE BC, https://canlii.ca/t/2cs2j. | For more information about each of the prohibited grounds, see [[BC Human Rights Code (6:III)#B. Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination | Chapter 6: Human Rights, Section III.B: Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination]]. See also “Recent Human Rights Cases of Interest for Employment Lawyers”, Michael A. Watt, Employment Law Conference 2014, Paper 4.1, CLE BC, https://canlii.ca/t/2cs2j. | ||
Though generally employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees, it is permitted if the discrimination is required due to a bona fide occupational requirement (ss 11, 13). To successfully argue the defence of a bona fide occupational requirement against a prima facie case of discrimination, a respondent must show the following: | Though generally employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees, it is permitted if the discrimination is required due to a bona fide occupational requirement (''HRC'' ss 11, 13). To successfully argue the defence of a bona fide occupational requirement against a prima facie case of discrimination, a respondent must show the following: | ||
# There is a legitimate job-related purpose for the respondent’s conduct; | |||
# The respondent adopted the standard or acted in good faith, believing the standard or conduct is necessary to achieve the legitimate job-related purpose; and | |||
# The respondent’s standard or conduct is reasonably necessary to the purpose, such that the respondent could not accommodate the complainant (or others sharing their characteristics) without undue hardship. | |||
If the employee appears to have been discriminated against based on a prohibited ground, see [[{{PAGENAME}}#1. Discrimination in Employment | Section V.F.1: Discrimination in Employment]] of this chapter for basic information on remedies for discrimination, or see [[BC Human Rights Code (6:III)#C. The Complaint Process | Chapter 6: Human Rights, Section III.C: The Complaint Process]] for more detailed information. | If the employee appears to have been discriminated against based on a prohibited ground, see [[{{PAGENAME}}#1. Discrimination in Employment | Section V.F.1: Discrimination in Employment]] of this chapter for basic information on remedies for discrimination, or see [[BC Human Rights Code (6:III)#C. The Complaint Process | Chapter 6: Human Rights, Section III.C: The Complaint Process]] for more detailed information. | ||
| Line 1,125: | Line 1,125: | ||
Federally regulated employees are covered by the ''Canadian Human Rights Act''. Similar protections are provided to that of the ''Human Rights Code'', though they are not identical. The ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' has recently been updated to include gender identity or expression as a prohibited ground of discrimination. | Federally regulated employees are covered by the ''Canadian Human Rights Act''. Similar protections are provided to that of the ''Human Rights Code'', though they are not identical. The ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' has recently been updated to include gender identity or expression as a prohibited ground of discrimination. | ||
Federal legislation allows employers to impose | Federal legislation allows employers to impose mandatory retirement, however, the BC provincial statute was amended in 2008 to prohibit this practice | ||
Federal equal pay provisions in the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' are somewhat broader than those found in B.C.’s ''Human Rights Code''. It is discriminatory under the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' to pay male and female employees different wages where the work that they are doing is of comparatively equal value. This means that even if the work itself is not demonstrably similar, the pay equity provisions may still be enforced if the value of the work is similar. Factors that are considered in determining whether work is of equal value include: skill, efforts and responsibility required, and conditions under which the work is performed (''Canadian Human Rights Act'', s 11(2)). | Federal equal pay provisions in the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' are somewhat broader than those found in B.C.’s ''Human Rights Code''. It is discriminatory under the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' to pay male and female employees different wages where the work that they are doing is of comparatively equal value. This means that even if the work itself is not demonstrably similar, the pay equity provisions may still be enforced if the value of the work is similar. Factors that are considered in determining whether work is of equal value include: skill, efforts and responsibility required, and conditions under which the work is performed (''Canadian Human Rights Act'', s 11(2)). | ||
