Recent cases dealing with the protected human rights ground of
"family status" provide employers with some additional
guidance (and confusion) regarding the scope of their obligations,
as courts, arbitrators and tribunals continue to try to balance the
childcare obligations of working parents and the legitimate
business needs of employers.
In the case of Simpson v. Pranajen Group Ltd. o/a Nimigon
Retirement Home, 2019 HRTO 10 ("Simpson"),
the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal examined the situation of an
employee named Jessica Simpson who was married with two young
children, ages 2 and 5. Ms. Simpson's eldest child had autism
and it was essential that a caregiver meet this child at the
family's home where the school bus delivered him each
weekday.1
