Oh my, no, that's not correct. It's completely free to make an application to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. Legal assistance for applicants is free. Legal costs can't be awarded. In other words, applicants bear no costs, while respondents are wholly responsible to pay their own legal bills, with no prospect of recovery even in cases of dismissal or favourable judgement. As to how often it happens, here's a link to the OHTR decisions from July alone, there's about 200 of them - https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/n...e/2014_07.html
In the example you construct, that's all it would take - an prospective employee disclosing they do not meet that condition as specified in the application, and subsequently not being selected for the position. Doesn't matter what the grounds are; that wording in the application alone is more than sufficient to substantiate an application to the OHTR that an employer would then have to respond to. This is not cheap, nor quick, nor obviously a problem any business needs.
As I said in my post prior, I think there would be a very hard case to make that if an applicant possessed an RPAL that TS could then discriminate on the basis of mental disorder or disability. As in impossible. The examples you cite AREN'T protected grounds as defined in the Ontario Human Rights Act; therefore you can ABSOLUTELY impose conditions like having a certain license or permit or whatever. Disabilities however, ARE protected from discrimination in the OHRA, as is the point of it.
Totally. Except for the 12 years I spent in the combat arms in the Army and those pesky field trips to places like Bosnia and Afghanistan.
Last edited by flashman; 08-10-2014 at 11:51 PM.
Lolz... I was trying to avoid being a smartass actually, I couldn't come up with a polite way to point out that psychopathy IS a personality disorder, so saying "a psychopath with a personality disorder" is redundant. Unless you mean a SECOND personality disorder of course. Although, actually, the question of bipolar psychopaths with a possible comorbid personality disorder possessing firearms isn't one for any of us to answer; that's for the CFO to decide after receiving information from that person's physician. That's why they have those questions on the PAL application and renewal forms. That's the process. I'm sure there are in fact a number of people with bipolar disorder who are licensed to own firearms in Canada. And many many more with diagnosed or un diagnosed psychopathic traits.
Last edited by flashman; 08-10-2014 at 11:57 PM.
Have you applied to a police force, flight school or military lately? Pretty sure you cant get a job there unless you have 20/20 vision and all psychological conditions met. We have just turned into a bunch of sissies in north America and think everything is personal and unfair.
Durka Durka..
To my knowledge, those careers have specific exemptions for certain types of discrimination. I am an air traffic controller, and the company is exempted to allow them to discriminate on the basis of several physical disabilities (vision, hearing). But they need special exemption to be able to do that.
the final say does come down to the CFO of the province. a business can higher whoever they like, but the CFO has to OK them and add them to the business license in the end. thats after a background check, and some other stuff to make sure the "employee" is ok by their standards.
working in the business i can see why that would be on the list. the ready access to firearms and ammunition.
working in a firearms store is very stressful, takes a certain kind of attitude and personality to work in one.
Here's how the process would go;
Someone applies
They see the part about metal illness
They file a complaint with human rights
Human rights sees the basic requirements to accept the claim
The company now has to hire a lawyer to counter the claim
The 2 parties will be sent to mediation were the company will pay out a couple grand (if they're smart)
With settlement, legal fees and time loss.... Most companies will loose about $10k
This isn't up for debate, this is how the law is set up to work.