Telefon: +385 1 2481 888 ·
Ruj 22

3A. Discuss the Employer’s Legal and Ethical Responsibility in This Scenario

Example: A 60-year-old Indigenous employee with a visual impairment says there are systemic barriers, including a non-inclusive organizational culture, strict rules for computer use, and a lack of accommodation. A survey is conducted in which all racialized employees are asked if they have experienced discrimination based on race, and all employees with disabilities are asked about their experiences. All these witnesses claim that they were neither discriminated against nor personal discrimination. This type of testimony is of limited importance for the specific allegations under investigation in this case. Since none of the witnesses have the same characteristics as the person who claims to be discriminated against, this testimony does not help determine whether the complainant was discriminated against as an Aboriginal person with a disability. Occupational health and safety legislation requires employers and workers to comply with all measures to promote occupational health and safety. Because of this obligation, employers must eliminate or reduce risks to the health and safety of employees caused by bullying in the workplace. There is a general obligation for individuals in positions of power within organizations to ensure that they take allegations of discrimination seriously. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has recognized that this includes the obligation in the workplace and other social spheres not to tolerate discriminatory acts and to investigate complaints of discrimination. [80] As noted above, employees have the right to be treated fairly and respectfully, and it is the company`s duty to ensure that individual leaders do not abuse their power or mistreat their subordinates. The behavior of killing the messenger at any level of management is inappropriate, as is any active or passive promotion of dishonest reports. Employees should feel free to address ethical or other issues without fear of reprisal. Employees have the right to rely on the employer`s obligations, especially in key areas such as compensation, salary increases and promotions.

Employers who chisel employees, break promises or treat them as if they were only instruments of the interests of the organization and not ends in themselves do not fulfill their moral responsibility. In many cases, bullying or bullying behaviour itself can constitute harassment or create a poisoned environment under the Code for which an employer is responsible if it does not recognize and address it. If an employee is harassed and the employer does not respond appropriately, it can discourage other workers from defending their own human rights. For example, an employee may not increase the need for housing until a crisis point has been reached. This kind of sense that human rights are not being respected in this workplace hinders an effective employer response, and unresolved issues continue to grow. If you remove an alleged harasser from the workplace or call the police, make sure that these types of judgments are not unduly influenced by racist or other stereotypes and prejudices. A best practice is to identify in advance the types of situations in which the police are called upon and to apply this policy in a fair and consistent manner. Example: A racialized employee with a disability claims to have been the subject of inappropriate comments because of his or her race and disability. A manager investigates and writes a report showing that the code was not violated because none of the alleged comments explicitly referred to the employee`s race or disability and because he never objected. The manager concludes that there was no discrimination because, although there was evidence that a serious comment was made, harassment requires behaviour or behaviour.

The outcome of this process would likely be wrong because the investigation did not properly apply human rights principles. This manager was unaware that even a comment, if serious enough, can poison the work environment and that it is a violation of the code. It should be noted that the following is only a brief overview. A detailed analysis of the right to strike and the application of the law to all real situations that may arise in relation to strikes would be beyond the scope of this document. Workers and employers who expect to participate in strikes should proceed with caution and on the basis of competent advice. Important human relationship of interdependence, which has a great impact on the individuals involved. A person`s work, like a person`s business, are very valuable assets that profoundly affect the lives of employees and their families. For stakeholders around the world, the relationship is charged with moral responsibility. Although the pressures of self-interest are very powerful and persuasive, workers and bosses should guide their decisions according to basic ethical principles, including honesty, openness, respect and care. When complaints are resolved internally, organizations must ensure that the settlement agreement and any signed authorizations are appropriate, understood by the parties and do not reflect an imbalance of authority. Employees should have the opportunity to seek legal advice before signing a settlement or leave.

A settlement agreement should reasonably reflect an assessment of the evidence supporting an employee`s allegations, the impact of the breach on the complainant, and an understanding of the potential remedies if the tribunal grants the claim. Human Rights Legal Support Centre: The amendments provide for the creation of a human rights legal support centre. The Centre will provide advice and support with respect to the violation of the rights set out in Part I of the Code. It will also provide legal services related to: Prior to the commencement of a hearing, the parties have the opportunity to resolve the case through the mediation of a court judge. If there is no solution, the case moves to a hearing.