Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 MAY 2015

Employers' Duty To Accommodate Does Not Include Turning Away Customers

CCPartners
Explore more from CCPartners

By now we all know that an employer in Ontario has a duty to accommodate an employee with a disability, so long as the accommodation does not cause the employer to face undue hardship.

CanadaEmployment and HR
Brian Silva
Brian Silva
Author LinkedIn connections

By now we all know that an employer in Ontario has a duty to accommodate an employee with a disability, so long as the accommodation does not cause the employer to face undue hardship.  The difficult question for employers is just what constitutes undue hardship?

This question was recently addressed by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in Pourasadi v. Bentley Leathers Inc., 2015 HRTO 138 (CanLII) where the Tribunal ruled that the limits of accommodation do not extend to turning away customers.

The Applicant was the Store Manager at the Respondent's shop where merchandise including purses, backpacks, briefcases and luggage of various sizes were sold. The Applicant often worked alone and approximately two-thirds of her position's duties involved assisting customers with the merchandise.

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

View source

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

WorkSafeBC Proposes Changes To Laws Regarding Workplace Harassment And Violence

WorkSafeBC is proposing significant amendments to British Columbia's Occupational Health and Safety Regulation that would fundamentally reshape how employers address workplace harassment, violence, and psychological health. The proposed changes introduce expanded definitions, new prevention program requirements, and obligations to identify and control psychosocial hazards. These amendments could require most B.C. employers to substantially revise their existing workplace policies and procedures.
CanadaEmployment and HR
Cassels
Cassels
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