Goods, services and facilities
You have the right to be free from discrimination when you receive goods or services, or use facilities. For example, this right applies to:
- stores, restaurants and bars
- hospitals and health services
- schools, universities and colleges
- public places, amenities and utilities such as recreation centres, public washrooms, malls and parks
- services and programs provided by municipal and provincial governments, including social assistance and benefits, and public transit
- services provided by insurance companies
- classified advertisement space in a newspaper.
Relevant policies and guides:
July 2003 - The main purpose of this report is to examine whether the Ontario Safe Schools Act and Regulations and the school board policies on discipline, known by some as “zero tolerance” policies, are having a disproportionate impact on racial minority students and students with disabilities. Advocates of zero tolerance argue that the policies are colour blind and fair because all the students who commit the same offence will be treated the same. Opponents point to other jurisdictions where there is data showing that suspensions and expulsions have a disproportionate impact on Black and other racial minority students and students with disabilities.
April 2004 - In the spring of 2001, the Commission began its efforts to engage the restaurant industry to promote the accessibility of its services and facilities for persons with disabilities in Ontario. The audit focused on the physical premises and services of seven select restaurant chains totaling 28 locations across the province.
April 2008 - In October 2007, in response to recent developments and ongoing concerns in the area of transit accessibility, the Commission began an inquiry into whether transit providers across the province announce transit stops. Through this initiative, the Commission hoped to improve awareness in the transit sector of the importance of announcing all stops for the purposes of inclusion and accessibility, and to secure commitments toward quickly developing and implementing stop announcement plans.
March 2002 - This submission is in response to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s (MAH) public consultation on the accessibility provisions of the Ontario Building Code (the “Building Code”). It has become increasingly clear to the Commission that the barrier-free requirements in the current Building Code have not been sufficient to achieve the degree of integration and full participation for persons with disabilities that is intended by the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Human Rights Code”).
2003 - The student with a disability (or his or her parent/guardian) has a responsibility to:
2003 - Under section 29 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Ontario Human Rights Commission has a mandate to forward human rights policy through education, monitoring, communication, research, inquiries and initiating investigations.
2003 - In 1998, the provincial government introduced a new funding formula for Ontario’s publicly-funded elementary and secondary school system. Under the new system, school boards no longer have the power to generate resources through taxation, and therefore depend on government grants to run the education system. Funding remains a major issue in ensuring that education is accessible at the post-secondary level. Increases in tuition fees have particular implications for students with disabilities whose educational costs may be significantly higher, and who, in many cases, are unable to hold down a part-time job to ease these costs.
April 2004 - The Commission is pleased to have the opportunity to make this public submission to the Toronto District School Board’s Safe and Compassionate Schools Task Force. The Commission makes this submission in accordance with its previously stated intent to examine the concern that the Safe Schools Act and related school board policies are having a discriminatory effect on racialized students and students with disabilities.
2003 - Barriers to education can take a variety of forms. They can be physical, technological, systemic, financial, or attitudinal, or they can arise from an education provider’s failure to make available a needed accommodation in a timely manner.
2004 - As part of the duty to accommodate, education providers are responsible for taking steps to plan for the accommodation of students with disabilities. Effective planning will take place both on an organizational and individual level.