The case I have chosen to do is June Purres vs. London Athletic Club (South) Inc., 2013 HRTO 1758. Part B: The prohibited grounds of discrimination that have been violated in this case are the grounds of disability and the bias of sex. This case is about how Ms. June Purres and how her employers refused to accommodate for his disability at work. Ms. Purres worked at the front of counter of an alethic center in London, where she welcomed and assisted the members of the center while doing some paperwork on the side. This job required Ms. Purres to stand at all times. While employed at the center, Ms. Purres become pregnant, and it said because of this pregnancy she was not able to stand for long periods of time without having her legs swell up to …show more content…
unboreable size, but it was not tested if the pregnancy was the main cause of the swelling. Once the swelling got worse, Ms. Purres went to the doctors’ note stating that it would be beneficial for her health if she did not stand for such long periods.
Ms. Purres then talked to her manager, Mr. Jim Pittam to either put a stool or chair behind front desk so she could sit while working. Mr. Pittam turned down the idea as there would not be enough space for other employees to pass by her and would make it difficult to get things from the cupboards that she would be covering. Respecting Mr. Pittam and not wanting to get into argument with him, Ms. Purres decided to work without the accommodation. After a while her legs start to swell more and her condition worsened, she then decided it would be best if she worked less hours as she was not being accommodated for her short term disability. She then applied to work part time instead of working the full time hours. She filed the request to Christy Heckman, the manager of operations and human resources, and her request was then granted. Ms. Purres was scared that working part time would affect the way her maternity leave, so she told the other employees that she would cover their shifts. In June 2010 Ms. Purres called the Ministry of Labour and was eventually advised of her rights to accommodation. After that she
filed another request from to Ms. Christy Heckman to get her full time hours work and in a way demanded that she be accommodated for her disability, with the request form she attached her doctor’s not that she had gotten in April of that year. Her request for her full time placement was rejected but was told that she could sit a table doing paper work whenever the front desk was not busy. She felt that this was not adequate accommodation as the front desk was never not busy and it was hard for her to walk that often. She then complained about this to the Human Rights Commission, who then looked into it. In their defence Ms. Christy Heckman and Mr. Jim Pittam said that it was not safe to put a stool behind the desk as many other employees walk by there and there was a chance she would be knocked of the stool by an employee getting by. They refused to put a chair behind the desk as there would be no space for employees to get by and it would not be possible for her to fulfill her duties as the desk was would be too high for her to work when sitting. The final decision made by the CHRC was that London Athletics Club was to pay Ms. Purres “amount equal to the difference between the applicant’s actual earnings, and the amount she would have earned working full-time, for the period from May 12, 2010, until the date she began her pregnancy leave” (thing). Also the London Athletics club would have to “reissue the Record of Employment issued at the time the applicant left for her pregnancy leave, revised to reflect earnings as if she had worked full-time” (thing). They would also have to pay Ms. Purres “monetary compensation for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect of $10,000 without deductions” (thing). In addition, the other employees of the athletics club that were in some kind of managerial position was required to “take the eLearning module “Human Rights 101” that is found on the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s website at www.ohrc.on.ca and confirm completion of same in writing to the applicant or her representative within 90 days of the date of this decision” (thing) There is a big lesson to be learned from this case. The big lesson here would be to learn to accommodate your employees as long as their reasons for accommodation are sensible. As long as their accommodations are sensible and not breaking grounds of undue hardship, an employer should do all they can do to accommodate their employees.
A summary of the case details (provide the circumstances surrounding the case, who, what, when, how)
Moran, John Jude. "Disability Discrimination." Employment Law: New Challenges in the Business Environment. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2014. 413-14. Print.
Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, gender, or religion. Race, color, national origin, gender, and religion are known as protected classes. The Supreme Court later established “several theories of discrimination that plaintiffs may purses based on the type of discrimination alleged.” (Melvin & Katz, 2015) The three most common theories are disparate treatment, mixed motives, and disparate impact. Aquino v. Honda is an example of disparate treatment as Aquino believe his was terminated, thus discriminated against, because of his race. Disparate Treatment is defined as “overt and intentional discrimination.” (Melvin & Katz, 2015)The burden of proof was on Honda to prove it had legitimate reason to terminate Aquino. The court ruled that Honda had met the burden of proof; the firing was not discriminatory as the accusations were not baseless nor did they amount to pretext. When the burned shifted back to Aquino to prove his firing was discriminatory in nature, he could not provide any
The Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 set out to end the discrimination people with disabilities encounter. The Act gave disabled people the right to employment, access to goods, facilities, and services and the right to buy and rent land and property. These rights came into force in December 1996, making treating a disabled person less favorably than an able-bodied person unlawful. Further rights came into force in October 1999, including the idea that service providers should consider making reasonable adjustments to the way they deliver their services so that people with a disability can use them. (The DDA...) However, despite these
Historically, females have been discriminated against in the United States based solely on their gender. Gender or sex discrimination may be described as the unfair treatment of a person in their employment because of that person's sex. It is illegal to discriminate based on sex and it may result in negative effects on employment include pay, position and title, advancements and training opportunities or whether or not an individual is hired or fired from a job.
The movement continues to make great strides towards the empowerment and self determination ("Disability rights movement," 2005, p. 3). On the other hand, it has not completely broken down barriers that continue to create the dynamics of oppression among such individuals. For instance, WIOA can be harmful to individuals with disabilities because there are still societal prejudices and biases associated with the stereotypical portrayal of people with disabilities and WIOA has played a role in it. For example, WIOA networks with employers to hire individual’s with disabilities and place them in conventional settings, where they work with others who have disabilities, for example, Walgreen’s and in fact, these participating organizations have also increased their pay. In my opinion, individual’s with disabilities should be able to work with individuals who are not disabled, as well. Furthermore, pay for those individuals who are still considered to be in “sheltered” work programs have not received an increase in pay. Additionally, according to my studies, in 2012, less than 30 percent of Florida’s civilians with disabilities between age 18-64 living in the community were employed. There is a greater priority focused on young people who are disabled. This is an additional issue in my opinion which can be considered discrimination, because, the focus leaves out middle aged individuals as well as,
Erkulwater, Jennifer L. Disability Rights and the American Social Safety Net. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is one of the most significant laws in American History. Before the ADA was passed, employers were able to deny employment to a disabled worker, simply because he or she was disabled. With no other reason other than the person's physical disability, they were turned away or released from a job. The ADA gives civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, and religion. The act guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, employment, transportation, State and local government services, and telecommunications. The ADA not only opened the door for millions of Americans to get back into the workplace, it paved the road for new facilities in the workplace, new training programs, and created jobs designed for a disabled society (Frierson, 1990). This paper will discuss disabilities covered by the ADA, reasonable accommodations employers must take to accommodate individuals with disabilities, and the actions employers can take when considering applicants who have disabilities.
The ADA prohibits employer discrimination against qualified individuals with a disability in regard to application procedures, hiring and firing, promotions, pay, training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment (Hernandez, 2001). This applies to the entire range of employer-employee relationships, including testing, work assignments, discipline, leave, benefits, and lay-offs. In addition, the ADA prohibits retaliation against individuals w...
...and the impact of the accommodation on the operation of the facility. Accommodations of a personal nature that are used both on and off the job (such as a guide dog for a visually-impaired employee, or a wheelchair) would not be the employers responsibility”(6).
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by Federal agencies, in programs receiving Federal financial assistance, in Federal employment, and in the employment practices of Federal contractors (US Department of Justice, 2011...
It is quite certain to say that discrimination can be deadly and can deprive a person from living a normal and happy life. Especially those with disability. Therefore, it is important for discriminatory practices to be avoided and dealt properly ones reported.. If these effects are dealt properly ,long term effects can be eliminated.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_270487.pdf [Accessed 28/01/14]. Scotch, R (1989) From Good Will to Civil Rights: Transforming federal disability policy. Temple University Press: Philadelphia, PA. Shakespeare, T (2006) Disability: Rights and Wrongs.
People with disabilities have become an integral part of the workforce. The ADA forbids discrimination against people with disabilities when recruiting, hiring, training, and compensating employees (Sotoa & Kleiner, 2013). The ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodation, communications, and governmental and establishes requirements for telecommunications relay services (activities (Stryker, R. (2013). Employers are not allowed to ask employees if they have a disability. The employers are not allowed to ask employees with disabilities to undergo a medical exam before an offer of employment unless all applicants are required to take the same exam (Kaye, Jans, & Jones, 2011). It is mandatory for organizations to make necessary accommodations for the employee’s disabilities unless it would create an undue hardship to the organization. However, new laws were passed stating that if accommodations would be too burdensome, and no other solutions can be found for the job, the disable person must be given another vacant job (Sotoa & Kleiner, 2013). The requirements for employers under ADA are very strict and organizations must work diligently to provide the needs of the employees with disabilities to comply with the law.
There are many forms of discrimination such as age, disability, transgender, and sex discrimination. This paper will focus on discrimination based on gender, race and age in the workplaces. All over the world, we hear about people treating each other prejudicially depending on their background, ethnicity, or sex orientation. Workplaces should be free from all personal biases but unfortunately, we hear about employees being discriminated against, almost, on a daily basis. Workplace discrimination can be described as treating an individual or a group of people differently than others.