CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 29863
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:38 am
 


Title: Human rights ruling says Manitoba woman was addicted to alcohol, unjustly fired | CTV News
Category: Strange
Posted By: Freakinoldguy
Date: 2015-09-16 11:35:53
Canadian


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:38 am
 


And since we were talking about the SCC being politically correct. How about this bullshit?

$1:
"The issue for determination in this matter is not whether the complainant was drinking on a given day but rather whether (the employer) made reasonable efforts to accommodate the complainant as soon as it was aware that she had a disability and special needs associated with that disability," Walsh wrote.


So now being an alcoholic is reason for your employer to accommodate the drunken binges that likely interfered with your job and got your fired.

I guess every addiction is now an disability that requires accommodation. ROTFL

I wait with bated breath for drunken bus drivers, coked up surgeons etcetera etcetera, hell the list is endless. Let's just accommodate everyone no matter if they're capable of doing the job safely or not.


Last edited by Freakinoldguy on Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 41564
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:43 am
 


Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And since we were talking about the SCC being politically correct. How about this?


The SCC and a Human Rights Tribunal are not even in the same league. I can at least respect the SCC.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Ottawa Senators


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1685
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:47 am
 


They fired her for the wrong reason - regardless of the doc she signed stating she would not drink off-hours/duty - totally wrong.

If they had fired her for safety reasons, after offering all the good stuff and counseling - then that I suspect, would be appropriate.

None of that takes into consideration the HRC - not to be confused with Hildabeast - that's the org every citizen should be afraid of until they are consigned to Hell.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:50 am
 


DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And since we were talking about the SCC being politically correct. How about this?


The SCC and a Human Rights Tribunal are not even in the same league. I can at least respect the SCC.



I'd respect both of them alot more if they used a little more common sense and lot less political correctness.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 41564
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 11:52 am
 


Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And since we were talking about the SCC being politically correct. How about this?


The SCC and a Human Rights Tribunal are not even in the same league. I can at least respect the SCC.



I'd respect both of them alot more if they used a little more common sense and lot less political correctness.


True, that. But common sense just isn't written into HRTs. ;)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 8:46 pm
 


There's nothing new about this, it's been the rule for years. The only thing that's new is that an employer didn't know the law.

Addiction and Mental illness are disabilities. No different than if they were unfit for work due to cancer or hepatitis. That's what disability programs are for. There are 1 or 2 who go out for addition of one kind or another at my company every year that I know of, maybe more. Maybe one day they'll be fit for a return to work, maybe they won't. If they fall off the wagon, their claim gets rejected and we terminate their employment. Most get the help they need and come back a new person. Only one didn't, but that was because he stopped cooperating with his Case Manager, so his claim got rejected. Also he ended up getting arrested and charged and his job required a clean record.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests



cron
 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.