Mr. WTF's back!
Good Day Readers:
When we saw this next story we immediately thought, yes, WTF? Perhaps Mr. WTF's alter ego Yogi Berra was right, "Deja vu all over again! Recall in May of 2001 the situation got so bad at the Canadian Human Rights Commission's Ottawa Office then Chief Commissioner Michelle Falardeau-Ramsay felt compelled to go public with the following:
Human Rights Commission Promises Workplace Improvements
Ottawa - May 18, 2001 - The Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission is promising employees she will work with them to create an improved workplace.
Michelle Falardeau-Ramsay has already made the pledge to staff in an internal memo. She is making public her response because of the high level of public interest in the workings of the Commission, and the need to have public confidence to do its job effectively.
"High levels of staff turnover told us there was a problem," said Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay. "That is why we decided to initiate an independent Workplace Assessment, and Commission personnel were actively involved in making that decision. The assessment report outlines the nature and extent of the challenges in our workplace in a transparent manner. We are now actively working together to meet those challenges."
Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay also addressed the issue of a Canadian Human Rights Commission lawyer who is on paid leave while he is under investigation for allegations of misconduct.
She says the seriousness of the complaint compelled the Commission to take action.
For reasons of confidentiality, Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay cannot discuss the matter further while it is under investigation.
Fast forward to today. Only difference it it's the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.Those responsible for insuring our human rights are protected can't seem to do the same for their employees.
We were reminded of the adage about the shoemaker. "Whose children run around the neighbourhood with holes in their shoes?"
Like you we too wondered about the relationship between The Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Here is is:
Jurisdiction - Canadian Human Rights Act
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has a statutory mandate to apply the Canadian Human Rights Act based on the evidence presented and on the case law. Created by Parliament in 1977, the Tribunal is the only entity that may legally decide whether a person or organization has engaged in a discriminatory practice under the Act. If one of the parties involved does not agree with the Tribunal's decision, an appeal may be filed at the Federal Court of Canada.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission is the first point of contact for registering a formal complaint under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal can only deal with cases which have been referred to it by the Commission. Since the CHRT functions like a court it must remain impartial. It cannot take sides in discrimination cases or make any decision without a formal investigation and referral by the CHRC.
The Tribunal's jurisdiction covers matters that come within the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada, including federal government departments and agencies and Crown corporations, as well as banks, airlines and other federally regulated employers and providers of goods, services, facilities and accommodation.
The Act prohibits discrimination on the following grounds:
When we saw this next story we immediately thought, yes, WTF? Perhaps Mr. WTF's alter ego Yogi Berra was right, "Deja vu all over again! Recall in May of 2001 the situation got so bad at the Canadian Human Rights Commission's Ottawa Office then Chief Commissioner Michelle Falardeau-Ramsay felt compelled to go public with the following:
Human Rights Commission Promises Workplace Improvements
Ottawa - May 18, 2001 - The Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission is promising employees she will work with them to create an improved workplace.
Michelle Falardeau-Ramsay has already made the pledge to staff in an internal memo. She is making public her response because of the high level of public interest in the workings of the Commission, and the need to have public confidence to do its job effectively.
"High levels of staff turnover told us there was a problem," said Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay. "That is why we decided to initiate an independent Workplace Assessment, and Commission personnel were actively involved in making that decision. The assessment report outlines the nature and extent of the challenges in our workplace in a transparent manner. We are now actively working together to meet those challenges."
Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay also addressed the issue of a Canadian Human Rights Commission lawyer who is on paid leave while he is under investigation for allegations of misconduct.
She says the seriousness of the complaint compelled the Commission to take action.
For reasons of confidentiality, Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay cannot discuss the matter further while it is under investigation.
Fast forward to today. Only difference it it's the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.Those responsible for insuring our human rights are protected can't seem to do the same for their employees.
We were reminded of the adage about the shoemaker. "Whose children run around the neighbourhood with holes in their shoes?"
Like you we too wondered about the relationship between The Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Here is is:
Jurisdiction - Canadian Human Rights Act
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has a statutory mandate to apply the Canadian Human Rights Act based on the evidence presented and on the case law. Created by Parliament in 1977, the Tribunal is the only entity that may legally decide whether a person or organization has engaged in a discriminatory practice under the Act. If one of the parties involved does not agree with the Tribunal's decision, an appeal may be filed at the Federal Court of Canada.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission is the first point of contact for registering a formal complaint under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal can only deal with cases which have been referred to it by the Commission. Since the CHRT functions like a court it must remain impartial. It cannot take sides in discrimination cases or make any decision without a formal investigation and referral by the CHRC.
The Tribunal's jurisdiction covers matters that come within the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada, including federal government departments and agencies and Crown corporations, as well as banks, airlines and other federally regulated employers and providers of goods, services, facilities and accommodation.
The Act prohibits discrimination on the following grounds:
- race
- national or ethnic origin
- colour
- religion
- age
- sex (includes pay equity, harassment (applies to all prohibited grounds, not just sex), pregnancy and childbirth)
- marital status
- family status
- sexual orientation
- disability (can be mental/physical, includes disfigurement, past or present, alcohol or drug dependence)
- conviction for which a pardon has been granted
Clare L. Pieuk
Head of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on stress leave, future uncertain
By Chris Cobb, Postmedia News
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Shirish Chotalia is Chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
OTTAWA — The embattled head of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has stepped aside in the aftermath of a scathing Federal Court decision that criticized her management of a landmark case involving the welfare of native children.
Head of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on stress leave, future uncertain
By Chris Cobb, Postmedia News
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Shirish Chotalia is Chair of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
OTTAWA — The embattled head of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has stepped aside in the aftermath of a scathing Federal Court decision that criticized her management of a landmark case involving the welfare of native children.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home