Language selector

Site

Search results

  1. Count me in! Collecting human rights-based data

    2010 - This guide is intended to be a practical resource for human resources professionals, human rights and equity advisors, managers and supervisors, unions, and any other people or groups considering a data collection project, or seeking support to do so. This guide may be particularly helpful to readers with little or no knowledge of data collection. The guide will discuss the benefits of data collection, and will highlight key concepts and practical considerations for organizations thinking of gathering data on Code and non-Code grounds. Appendices A to F offer concrete examples of how non-profit, private and public-sector organizations have successfully developed and implemented data collection projects.
  2. Policy and guidelines on discrimination because of family status

    March 2007 - This Policy sets out the Commission’s position on discrimination on the basis of family status as it relates to the provisions of the Code. It deals only with issues that fall within the Code and that could be the subject of a human rights complaint. At the same time, the Policy interprets the protections of the Code in a broad and purposive manner, consistent with the principle that the quasi-constitutional status of the Code requires that it be given a liberal interpretation that best ensures its anti-discriminatory goals are attained. The Commission’s Consultation Report contains a broader examination of social policy issues affecting persons disadvantaged by family status.
  3. Ontario Human Rights Commission Submission regarding Interim Reports of the Commission for the Review of Social Assistance in Ontario

    March 2012 - The OHRC will focus its comments on the issues and barriers identified in the CRSAO’s reports that connect to the OHRC’s current priority initiatives dealing with racism experienced by Aboriginal people and other groups as well as disability, especially mental health discrimination.

  4. The relationship between religions and a secular society

    From: Creed, freedom of religion and human rights - Special issue of Diversity Magazine - Volume 9:3 Summer 2012

    The first step in developing a framework for the interface between a secular society and religion is to define the role of the “secular” state. This paper identifies four interpretations of the meaning of “secular” and identifies legal cases that use several different interpretations.

  5. Compliance and promotion through the Human Rights Commission

    From: From research to legislation: Challenging public perceptions and getting results

    Human rights commissions, established in almost all jurisdictions in Canada, typically have broad mandates to enforce and promote human rights. The purpose of promotion activity is to inform and educate in order to create awareness and impart knowledge of human rights. Protection of rights depends on people knowing about the rights they have and available mechanisms to enforce them, as well as knowing and accepting their obligations to uphold those rights.

  6. IV. Defining family status

    From: The cost of caring: Report on the consultation on discrimination on the basis of family status

    1. The Current Code Definition

    The Code includes two grounds that provide protections for persons in relationships: marital status and family status. “Marital status” is defined in section 10 of the Code as “the status of being married, single, widowed, divorced or separated and includes the status of living with a person in a conjugal relationship outside marriage”, including both same-sex and opposite sex relationships. “Family status” is defined as “the status of being in a parent and child relationship.”

  7. IX. Employment

    From: Policy and guidelines on discrimination because of family status

    To a significant degree, the workplace is still built on the assumption that families are composed in a ‘traditional’ fashion, of two married heterosexual parents, one of whom is providing full-time caregiving for children, aging relatives, and other family members as necessary. Work schedules, policies and benefits all too often reflect the assumption that employees do not have substantial caregiving obligations. The corollary to this assumption is the belief that workers who do have substantial caregiving obligations are in some way inferior and undesirable employees.

Pages