As employee requests for accommodation on the basis of family
status become more common, employers have been attempting to
ascertain their specific obligations. Unfortunately, the case law
surrounding family status accommodation has contained little in the
way of definable markers, and divining an employer's specific
responsibilities has become increasingly difficult.
However, a decision of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, Devaney v. ZRV Holdings Limited, has recently
provided some assistance by establishing a new test that focuses on
the distinction between the preferences and needs of employees.
Devaney had been an architect with ZRV Holdings for 25 years
when in 2007 his physical presence at work began to decrease.
As Devaney was a leader for a major project, ZRV required that he
be physically present at the office during regular working
hours. Nevertheless, Devaney continued to work remotely as
necessary to tend to his elderly mother. On January 9,
