Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 OCTOBER 2008

Criminal Offences And Discrimination In The Workplace

Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
Explore more from Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP

The Supreme Court of Canada recently handed down a decision in Montréal (City) v. Québec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) where it examined the rule, set out in Section 18.2 of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms (Charter), preventing employers from dismissing or refusing to hire someone owing to the mere fact that that person was convicted of a criminal offence, if that person has been pardoned.

CanadaEmployment and HR
Maude Grenier
Maude Grenier
Author LinkedIn connections

The Supreme Court of Canada recently handed down a decision in Montréal (City) v. Québec (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) where it examined the rule, set out in Section 18.2 of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms1 (Charter), preventing employers from dismissing or refusing to hire someone owing to the mere fact that that person was convicted of a criminal offence, if that person has been pardoned. This rule applies despite the existence of a link between the offence and the job.

The Facts

In November 1995, the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) informed a job candidate that her application for employment as a police officer had been rejected. The candidate contacted the SPVM and was told she had been turned down because she did not satisfy the "good moral character" requirement in the Police Act2 and the By-law respecting standards of the Sûreté du Québec and municipal police forces for the hiring

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Tariffs, Terminations And EI: Implications Of Canada’s New Support Package For Employers

Canada's federal government has announced a $3.5 billion rapid response support package in anticipation of retaliatory tariffs against the United States, introducing new temporary employment insurance measures and workforce retention programs. The package extends EI benefits, waives waiting periods, and creates funding opportunities for employers to retain and retrain workers rather than implement large-scale layoffs.
CanadaEmployment and HR
Siskinds LLP
Siskinds LLP
Article

Unsubstantiated Findings In Workplace Investigations: What To Do When You Can’t Decide

When workplace investigators face difficult decisions, many default to marking allegations as "unsubstantiated" to avoid risk. However, this seemingly safe approach carries significant organizational costs, undermines complainant trust, and often stems from insufficient training in credibility assessment and the balance of probabilities standard.
CanadaEmployment and HR
RT Workplace Training & Consulting Inc.
RT Workplace Training & Consulting Inc.
Article

Silva v. Royal Bank Of Canada: A Cautionary Tale About Terminating For Cause

A financial planner's wrongful dismissal case against RBC resulted in over $2.5 million in damages after the bank filed an inaccurate termination notice that destroyed her career prospects. The Ontario Superior Court found the bank's conduct vindictive and its allegations of cause unproven, raising critical questions about employer obligations when reporting terminations in the investment industry.
CanadaEmployment and HR
Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP
Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP