Essay Sample on Human Rights Tribunal of Alberta

Introduction

The human rights law aims at protecting the individuals from discriminatory treatment. The human rights tribunal of Alberta entails the provincialhuman rights law which protects the individuals against discrimination through the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Since the discrimination occurs in connection with specific activities, the Alberta Human Rights Commission protects the individuals on the grounds of race, color, religious beliefs as well as gender and sexual harassment. The activities such as employment practices and employment advertisement are also issuing the Alberta Human Rights Commission protects the individuals against. The Alberta Human Rights Commission also publishes defenses on the party accused of discrimination with the employer permitted to impose restrictions for the job requirements. Therefore, the person discriminated may have to prove the perception was issuing reasonable and justifiable circumstances. The employment equity reveals that additional actions have to be taken to ensure the disadvantaged are represented in the workforce through the policy of affirmative action.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Cabot v. Enerflex Ltd., 2019 AHRC 1

Cabot, an employee of Enerflex, had his employment terminated with no cause. As a result, a complaint was filed by Victoria Cabot based on the Alberta Human Rights Commission. In the claim, the discrimination of Cabot against employment was the central allegation with Enerflex attempting to determine if Cabot was medically fit to work. It was also alleged that the declining mental state and no means of support made him sign the general release. On behalf of Darcy Cabot, Victoria Cabot filed a complaint with Darcy Cabot the main complainant alleging the discrimination against his employment rights. The respondent filed a response taking the position that the executed release was valid and enforceable. The Tribunal was then appointed to hear the preliminary matter based on the validity as well as enforcement of the Release that was signed by Cabot. In the case where Release is found valid and enforceable, the Commission may not have to consider the complaint by Cabot on the merits.

The Tribunal decision as required by the Alberta Human Rights Commission was based on the documents and evidentiary matters that was relied on during the hearing. The Tribunal for distribution to both parties covered the legal points as well as the authorities for the complainant. Based on the medical journal publication concerning the employee's illness, the hearing was closed since the authorities, and scholarly articles submitted the case yet could only rely on the case law. With the complainant taking the position of suffering from the brain related issue at the time of his employment decision, the decision was finally reached at. The complainant being a successful employee till the time of his termination that was influenced by the imbalance of knowledge and power between the parties, the submissions made concerning the merits of the complaint were found to be valid. The respondent position on the Release was limited in such away that none of it was applicable in the matter before the Tribunal. As a result, the complainant satisfied the Tribunal compelling on the grounds of setting the Release aside.

The particular decision by the Tribunal based on the Alberta Human Rights Commissionwas due to the Release signed by the complaint which was to be determined as valid or enforceable. With the law based on the validity and enforcement settled by the Alberta Human Rights Commission, the Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to deal with the complaint in respect to discrimination. As a result, the court would be held liable for determining the validity provided the Tribunal consideration is based on the actual language of the release, unconscionability as well as undue influence arising from the attack of consent, oppression as well as abuse of power. The other consideration of the Tribunal for the particular decisions includes the lack of capacity by the complainant, mutual mistakes as well as forgery.

From this particular decision, the other employers have a broader lesson to learn. Firstly, the employers have to realize that being federally regulated requires the creation of an employment equity plan where the employee might voluntarily submit a request based on the Human Rights Commission. Also, from the decision, the employers learn the need to resolve the issues of discrimination through the condominium corporation which could stop and correct the discrimination issues and concerns. From the Alberta Human Rights Commission, the complainant has to resolve the human rights matters through the court or agreement by the employer. Therefore, the employer has to know the federal laws that cover the employees and distinguish the pay equality with the employment equity through the various legal concepts. On the other hand, the employer learns that the employee should be permitted to work if the employer knows what the employing is work on and does not cause the employee to stop working. Through the employer disposal, the employee also learns to remain under the direction of the employer for the available work.

Kebede v. SGS Canada Inc. 2018 AHRC 12

The case between Kebede v. SGS Canada Inc.has the director having the carriage hence request for the adjournment due to the director's counsel. The complaint, however, asks the hearing to proceed due to lack of satisfaction on the reason for the postponement of the conference. Based on the dissatisfaction of the complainant, another current director's counsel was to replace the director for the scheduled hearing to proceed. Due to the significant delay in the processing of the complaint about the matters of the Tribunal, there was the need for a resolution meeting for the hearing. Also, due to lack of enough funds by the director's counsel, there was an intention for the director's counsel to attend over the video link while expressing the concern over the hearing proceedings. Lack of significant detail on the exploration of the options for the hearing proceeding indicated that the council could not take over the matter. The complainant, therefore, had to make non-refundable arrangements with the wish for the hearing to proceed.

As a result, the procedural manual for the Tribunal hearing was stated such that no adjournment could be made since it denied the complainant the natural justice. The Tribunal had to balance the rights of the complainant and that of the respondent with fair hearing based on the delays that resulted from the adjournment. The suspension as a result of its cause to the impairment amounting to the defense thus dismissal of the complaint despite its potential merits.The Tribunal being mindful of the justice delayed the decisions were reached. Since the decision could lead to unnecessary disrepute in the Alberta Human Rights Act, the Tribunal limited its hearing capacity with the commitment of a particular hearing that utilized the resources to address the complaint.

The particular decision was due to the necessity of the adjournment of the hearing, the director's counsel did not explain acting on behalf of the director. It showed that no efforts were made on the concerns and ability of the director before the scheduled hearing dates. Based on the complaint, the parties did not consider the matter to seek permission to dispense the briefs thus no preparation for the hearing. The lack of evidence for the scheduled hearing led to the issues becoming complex for the director's counsel leading to the need of addressing its necessaries. Firstly, the adjournment led to the non-refundabletypes expenses, therefore, expressing doubts on the ability of the director to handle the complaint. Also, the complainant raised concern over the strength of the director's counsel to travel and attend the hearing thus the adjournment due to financial position. The delays and adjournments were considered for the decision made by the Tribunal due to the resulting waste of substantial hearing time. The adjournment resulted in a negative impact for the complainant while leading to waste of valuable Tribunal resources. As a result, the delayed resolution with lack of information led to the negative consequences for the decision made by the Tribunal.

From the particular decision, the employers learn a broader lesson with the directors needs to be readily available for providing satisfactory confirmation. The employer, therefore, has to understand and respond to the employees complain during the working schedule conflict. Since the court upholds the human rights, the ruling always clarifies the employer's obligations hence need to be mindful of the circumstances at work. With the Tribunal decisions dealing with the issue on the conflict of employee's discrimination, there is a need for clarity and provision of good ideas on accommodating the employees in the organization. From the regulation of the federal human rights, the employees are protected from the discrimination of the organization based on the family status. Therefore, there is a need to extend the obligations for the neglected while providing the necessary support as well as refundable means for the complainant. Since the employer has the right to seek evidence from appropriate professional hence the allowance for adjournment should be provided. However, the employer has to understand that the specific duties of an employee have a lot of weight on a complaint hence effort of the Tribunal to find the solution.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the federal employment legislation covers the organizations with federal responsibilities. Through the jurisdiction that requires the development of the employment equity, the in consideration of the federally regulated employment equity plan for the employees. Also, from the Alberta Human Rights Commission, resolving the issues of discrimination requires condominium corporation hence permitting the employees to work without being stopped by the employer whichever the situation. Dealing with the problems of employee's discrimination requires clarity of the organizational goals hence protecting the employees from the bad side of the employers. The provision of the federal human rights should consider support in the protection of the employees from discrimination concerning their neglection based on the race, gender, age, religion as well as origin. The minority groups should be considered with equal priority by other for protection against employment discrimination.

References

Cabot v. Enerflex Ltd., 2019 AHRC 1

Kebede v. SGS Canada Inc. 2018 AHRC 12