Canadian Employment Law Today

CANADIAN EMPLOYMENT LAW TODAY Waiting to last minute will distract managers Continued from page 1 his job in accessible formats. That might mean producing documents in large print or ensuring online training courses have accompanying audio components for visually impaired employees, or include captioning for those who may be hearing impaired. Whatever the specifics, an organization's communication requirements may become more complex in the coming years. It could change your policy framework Employers will be required to develop an employment policy statement accessible to the entire organization, develop and maintain policies supporting that policy statement, and train employees on the details of the statement. It's important to have a trained HR practitioner involved in the drafting of these policies to ensure full compliance. As with any new legislative requirement on the HR law front, remember that it always pays to take a proactive approach. It takes time to implement many of these new measures and train manag- ers and employees to observe policies. In some cases, employers who did not have to comply with the first phase of AODA will be required to implement new infrastructure in their workplaces, such as ramps or hand railings to provide full accessibility. Again, there is a cost to implementing any of these measures, and leaving the task to the last minute only threatens to distract managers from their core duties if they're forced to embark on a last-minute mad dash to comply with requirements for which there has been plenty of notice. Attempting to comply without professional help, or simply hoping your organization evades the reach of the government of Ontario, only invites unwanted attention and further challenges. It pays to act now to avoid costly legal bills and potential fines down the road. Despite its challenges, it also makes sense to look at AODA as exactly what it is: A beneficial piece of legislation designed to improve accessibility for all Ontarians. Employers stand to benefit by widening the pool of talent they can tap into should have made reasonable inquiries into the employee's condition and possibilities for accommodation. The employer was ordered to pay damages for lost wages and injury to dignity. In Nghiem v. Frendel Kitchens Ltd., on the other hand, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal considered a post-termination claim of disability, but found that the employer had not failed in its duty to inquire. There, the employee was dismissed for insubordination, and then claimed afterward he had a disability requiring accommodation. The tribunal determined that, at the time of dismissal, the employer had no reason to suspect a disability. As a result, the complaint was dismissed. In this situation, the organization was not aware the employee was suffering from a disability when her employment was terminated. The question, therefore, will be whether there were sufficient warning signals before the dismissal to trigger the duty to inquire under the applicable human rights leg- About the Author Laura Williams Laura Williams is the founder and principal of Williams HR Law, a human resources law firm in Markham, Ont., serving employers exclusively. She can be reached at (905) 205-0496 or lwilliams@ williamshrlaw.com For more information see: Mall) Ltd. v. Mendham, 2011 CarswellBC 3672 (B.C. S.C.). •Rawlco Radio Ltd. v. Lozinski, 2012 CarswellSask 786 (Sask. Q.B.). •Sylvester v. British Columbia Society of Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse, 2002 CarswellBC 3216 (B.C. Human Rights Trib.). •Nghiem v. Frendel Kitchens Ltd., 2011 HRTO 717 (Ont. Human Rights Trib.). •Rhebergen v. Creston Veterinary Clinic Ltd., 2013 CarswellBC 169 (B.C. S.C.). •Travel Co. v. Keeling, 2009 CarswellAlta 1057 (Alta. Q.B.). •Hub International (Richmond Auto Colin G.M. Gibson is a partner with Harris and Company in Vancouver. He can be reached at (604) 891-2212 or cgibson@ harrisco.com. Disclosure of disability Continued from page 2 by making jobs accessible to those with disabilities, while also making it easier for individuals with disabilities to do business with their organization. The initial bottom-line costs of implementation — although potentially burdensome — will in many cases be mitigated by increased sales in the future. islation. If there were not, the employer should have a good argument that the employee has no grounds for a discrimination complaint. WEBINARS Interested in learning more about employment law issues directly from the experts? Check out the Carswell Professional Development Centre's live and on-demand webinars discussing topics such as family status accommodation, young workers and the law, gender expression and identity in the workplace, best hiring practices, social media in the workplace, and accommodation for persons with disabilities. To view the webinar catalogue, visit cpdcentre.ca/hrreporter. Published by Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2013 7

• Cover