The Code protects people from discrimination and harassment because of past, present and perceived disabilities. “Disability” covers a broad range and degree of conditions, some visible and some not visible. A disability may have been present from birth, caused by an accident, or developed over time.
There are physical, mental and learning disabilities, mental disorders, hearing or vision disabilities, epilepsy, mental health disabilities and addictions, environmental sensitivities, and other conditions.
- Policy on accessible education for students with disabilities (2018)
- Policy on drug and alcohol testing (2016)
- Policy on ableism and discrimination based on disability (2016)
- Policy on preventing discrimination based on mental health disabilities and addictions (2014)
- Policy on environmental sensitivities (Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2014)
October 2010 - The OHRC is again raising a number of concerns about the proposed Integrated Accessibility Regulation, echoing those we’ve highlighted in past AODA submissions. Specifically, the proposed IAR fails to identify interpretive human rights principles upfront and apply them to many of its provisions.
March 2011 - Pursuant to my duty under Section 29 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, I am writing to all registered political parties in Ontario to help promote awareness about the importance of accessible elections for voters and candidates with disabilities as well as those seeking nomination.
October 2011 - In recent months, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has been examining the issue of accessible elections for both voters and candidates with disabilities. That is why we were pleased to learn the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has initiated a study on participation in political and public life in accordance with Article 29 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This update on our related activities serves as our submission to your study.
March 2011 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) continues to have serious concerns with the Ontario Government’s most recent Proposed Integrated Accessibility Regulation released for public comment. The Government is also proposing related changes to Ontario Regulation 429/07, Customer Service, and to Ontario Regulation 629, Vehicles for the Transportation of Physically Disabled Passengers.
Factum of the interveners the Ontario Human Rights Commission, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission and the Alberta Human Rights Commission.
January 2014 - The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has used a range of its functions to reduce and eliminate discrimination relating to land use planning. However, to meet Ministry goals and be consistent with Ontario’s Human Rights Code, the land use planning and appeal system needs to incorporate a human rights lens and provide human rights-related information, education and resources to those who implement and use the system. Planners and decision-makers throughout the system and in municipalities will benefit from clear guidance from the Province.
Mr. Tang alleged that the respondents, McMaster University, the Faculty of Health Sciences, the Centre for Student Development and the Medical Sciences Graduate Program, breached the Human Rights Code by failing to meet their substantive and procedural obligations to accommodate him.
The applicant, Ian Cole, is a middle-aged man with a severe intellectual disability who lives in the community. To live in the community, Mr. Cole depends on the receipt of nursing services. The primary source of funding for the nursing services is his local Community Care Access Centre (CCAC). The maximum funding for nursing services is set out in a regulation made under the Home Care and Community Services Act, 1994. At the time the application was filed, funding was available for nursing services to a maximum of four visits per day.