Search

Search results

1. 4. Cadre stratégique

   From: Politique sur la prévention de la discrimination fondée sur la croyance

   La croyance est l’un des motifs de discrimination interdits aux termes du Code des droits de la personne de l’Ontario. Au moment d’interpréter le sens du mot « croyance », il est important de tenir compte du fait que la province a adopté ce terme (« creed » en anglais) dans ses mesures législatives touchant les droits de la personne, et non un terme différent (comme religion, convictions religieuses ou croyance religieuse, utilisées par d’autres compétences dans leurs lois relatives aux droits de la personne).

2. 4. Context for the Inquiry

   From: Right to Read inquiry report

   WARNING: This section deals with topics that may cause trauma to some readers. It includes references to bullying, emotional and physical abuse, mental health challenges, self-harm and suicide. Please engage in self-care as you read this material.

3. 4. Creed

   From: Policy on preventing discrimination based on creed

   Policy framework

   Creed is a prohibited ground of discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The fact that Ontario adopted the term creed (or "la croyance" in French) in its human rights legislation, and not another term (such as religion, religious belief or religious creed as used in other Canadian human rights statutes), is significant when interpreting its meaning. It suggests that creed may have a meaning that is distinct from these other closely related terms.^[65]  

4. 4. Designing application forms

   From: Human Rights at Work 2008 - Third Edition

   a) General principles

   This section outlines key considerations for application forms and parts of application forms that raise concerns about Code violations. Employers can use this information to make sure that the application forms they use are non-discriminatory and relate only to qualifications and requirements relevant to the job and the hiring decision. When application forms include inappropriate questions relating to Code grounds, an inference can be made that such questions may have influenced a decision not to hire.

5. 4. Human rights organizational change: key terms

   From: Human rights and policing: Creating and sustaining organizational change

   Effective human rights organizational change requires a solid understanding of the legal and ethical requirements of human rights in Ontario, and the elements of effective organizational change.

6. 4. Intersecting grounds

   From: Policy on ableism and discrimination based on disability

   Discrimination may be unique or distinct when it occurs based on two or more Code grounds. Such discrimination is said to be “intersectional.” The concept of intersectional discrimination recognizes that people’s lives involve multiple interrelated identities, and that marginalization and exclusion based on Code grounds may exist because of how these identities intersect.

7. 4. Potential threshold criteria for qualifying as a creed

   From: Human rights and creed research and consultation report

   Whatever policy definition is eventually adopted, leaving the definition of creed completely open-ended, without any threshold criteria, could impose too onerous a burden on Ontario organizations to determine what constitutes a creed meriting protection under the Code. It would also fail to recognize the few limits and guidelines that have been set out in existing case law.

8. 4. Summary of key themes and next steps

   From: Under suspicion: Research and consultation report on racial profiling in Ontario

   4.1. Key themes

   • The widespread nature of incidents of racial profiling reported during the consultation, along with a growing body of case law and social science and legal research, confirms that racial profiling exists and is a broad concern shared by many Ontarians.
      

9. 4. Systemic faithism

   From: Human rights and creed research and consultation report

   Systemic faithism refers to the ways that cultural and societal norms, systems, structures and institutions directly or indirectly, consciously or unwittingly,[128] promote, sustain or entrench differential (dis)advantage for individuals and groups based on their faith (understood broadly to include religious and non-religious belief systems). Systemic faithism can adversely affect both religious and non-religious persons, depending on the context, as discussed in the examples below.

10. 4. The OHRC’s 2008-2012 priorities, initiatives and impacts

    From: Ontario Human Rights Commission Submission regarding Section 57 three-year statutory review of the Ontario Human Rights System

    In November 2008, following public town hall meetings with individuals and groups across the province, the OHRC finalized strategic and business plans to guide its work under its new mandate for the following three years. Our aim is to educate, empower and mobilize partners in communities across the province to raise awareness, help identify concerns and implement solutions.

Pages