Human Rights Legislation Quiz

A type of discrimination where policies or practices, seemingly neutral, negatively impact certain groups.

Policies or practices that appear neutral but have a discriminatory impact on specific groups.

Analyzing data to identify patterns of discrimination. For instance, if a company has fewer women in leadership roles compared to the overall workforce.

Human Rights Law covers actions by both the private and public sectors, extending to individual behaviors.

The Charter only applies to government actions, while Human Rights Law applies to individuals and both public and private organizations.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms only applies to government actions, whereas provincial human rights statutes apply to both individuals and corporations.

Human rights legislation in Alberta and BC requires employers to maintain a workplace free from discrimination and harassment, and to make employment decisions on a non-discriminatory basis.

The Individual’s Rights Protection Act (IRPA) in Alberta was initially focused on protecting visible minorities from discrimination.

The Alberta Act (formerly IRPA) prohibits discrimination in employment on 15 grounds, including race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.

Primacy legislation takes precedence over other provincial legislation unless specifically stated otherwise.

The Alberta Human Rights Act (formerly IRPA) was originally passed as primacy legislation in Alberta, giving it precedence over other provincial legislation.

The BC Code (Human Rights Code) came into effect in 1973 and has been updated several times, most recently in 2018.

The IRPA (now the Alberta Act) introduced a human rights commission to educate the public, promote human rights, and administer the law.

A person's sense of their own gender, which may be different from their sex assigned at birth. It can be fixed or fluid, and includes how someone identifies as a man, woman, transgender, or non-binary.

How someone expresses their gender through their actions, appearance, and behaviors, such as dress, hair, makeup, body language, and voice. This may or may not align with their gender identity.

An umbrella term that encompasses individuals with diverse gender identities and expressions that do not conform to societal expectations of what it means to be a man or woman.

A person whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. They may or may not choose to medically align their body with their gender identity.

A legal principle that prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and expression, ensuring equal treatment regardless of how someone identifies or expresses their gender.

A legal case that established a precedent for understanding discrimination based on gender expression and identity in British Columbia, demonstrating how the BC Tribunal approaches such cases.

The legal process of challenging discriminatory actions or policies based on gender identity or expression, often involving a formal complaint and investigation.

A set of guidelines and definitions established by human rights tribunals, guiding how discrimination based on gender expression and identity is understood and addressed.

The BC Human Rights Code prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals based on their sexual orientation, whether actual or perceived.

The BC Human Rights Code allows employers to refuse employment or terminate employment based on criminal convictions that are directly related to the specific job or intended job.

The BC Human Rights Code exempts employers from the requirement to preserve the employment status of individuals who are serving a prison sentence for a criminal offense. This means employers can terminate employment if an individual is incarcerated.

The BC Court of Appeal affirmed that the Human Rights Code does not guarantee employment protection for individuals serving prison sentences, even if the conviction was unrelated to the job.

The Alberta Human Rights Act does not explicitly list "criminal record" as a prohibited ground of discrimination. This means that employers in Alberta may be able to use an individual's criminal record as a reason for making employment decisions.

In BC, employers can use a criminal record as a basis for refusing employment only if the conviction is directly related to the job or intended job and poses a real risk to the workplace.

The "bona fide occupational requirement" (BFOR) defense allows employers in BC to justify discriminatory practices if the practice is necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the business.

The "BFOR" defense must be carefully assessed. The employer needs to demonstrate a reasonable connection between the practice and the job, and that there are no less discriminatory alternatives.

A type of damages awarded in cases of discrimination, recognizing the harm caused to a person's sense of self-worth and emotional well-being.

Damages awarded to compensate for lost income and pension benefits due to inability to work.

A factor considered when calculating damages, accounting for the possibility that a person's harm might have occurred regardless of the discrimination.

The process of reducing the amount of damages awarded, often due to the application of a contingency factor.

The significant distress and harm experienced by an individual subjected to discrimination, often resulting in mental, emotional, and physical deterioration.

A workplace environment characterized by hostile actions or behavior based on discriminatory motives.

The decision of a tribunal to award a substantial amount of damages, indicating a recognition of the severity of the discrimination.

A formal process where a tribunal examines evidence and determines the validity of claims related to discrimination.

An employer must demonstrate that a standard is necessary for the job, reasonably necessary to achieve that job purpose, and that it is impossible to accommodate employees with the characteristic in question without undue hardship.

In Meiorin, this means the employer must show that accommodating employees with the specific characteristic without any undue hardship is impossible. For example, demanding aerobic fitness for firefighter jobs might be discriminatory if it restricts qualified individuals from doing the job without undue hardship.

The third part of the Meiorin test, often called the "undue hardship" part, focuses on whether accommodating the individual or group without undue burden is impossible.

The employer must have considered different standards that acknowledge individual and group differences, rather than assuming one standard fits all, in order to meet the duty to accommodate.

The employer must explore other non-discriminatory options, like individualized assessments, before implementing a potentially discriminatory standard.

The employer must justify their choice not to do so. The justifications need to be valid and relevant to the work.

The employer should ensure that a standard is truly necessary and does not place an unnecessarily high burden on those it applies to.

The employer should look for ways to achieve the same goal, but with a less discriminatory approach. This could involve adjusting the standard or using different assessments.