-
Vaccine Safety Concerns Are Not Religious Beliefs — Complaint Dismissed for Lack of Evidence
Does an employee’s refusal to comply with a COVID-19 vaccination mandate — framed around vaccine safety concerns and demands for legal liability assurances — amount to a sincerely held religious belief? The BC Human Rights Tribunal held it does not, dismissing the complaint for having no reasonable prospect of success on either religious belief or…
-
Vaccine Exemption Denial and Discrimination — When Disagreement With a Decision Is Not Enough
Can an employee who was denied a medical exemption from a COVID-19 vaccination order bring a human rights complaint against the regulatory body that assessed her application? The BC Human Rights Tribunal found that while such a complaint is not automatically barred as an attack on legislation, the complainant must show some evidence connecting a…
-
Universal Health Measures and Perceived Disability — Pre-Shift Testing Is Not Evidence of Discrimination
Does requiring an unvaccinated employee to undergo a rapid COVID-19 test before each shift amount to treating her as though she has a disability? The BC Human Rights Tribunal held it does not — a neutral, universally applied infection-control measure is not, without more, evidence that an employer perceives a particular employee to be disabled.
-
Scoring Matrices and Promotion Grievances — Why “Efficiency” Cannot Be Buried Inside Other Criteria
When a collective agreement lists “efficiency and qualifications” as the criteria for a promotion or transfer, can an employer satisfy its obligations simply by embedding efficiency within the other scored qualifications on an interview matrix? In this expedited arbitration under section 104 of the Labour Relations Code, Arbitrator Beharrell held that the answer is no…
-
Salary Maintenance for Training — Drawing the Line Between Required and Voluntary
When an employer identifies a training need and invites employees to bid for spots, does “salary maintenance” — including shift premiums — apply as though the training were mandatory? Arbitrator Sullivan held it does not: the key distinction is whether the employee is compelled to attend, or voluntarily pursues a career-enhancing opportunity.
-
Part-Time Pro-Ration of Education Expenses — Plain Language Prevails Over Bargaining History
Does the $1,000 annual cap on education expense reimbursement apply in full to part-time employees, or is it pro-rated along with all other benefits listed in the collective agreement’s part-time pro-ration clause? In this grievance, Arbitrator Bell held that clear, plain language in a collective agreement will be enforced as written — and bargaining history…
The Pulse: BC Case Law
Webinars
Our complimentary webinars address the practical and legal issues for Canadian employers.
View our Webinars