Commission Publication
Fall/Winter 1996
| Supreme Court of Canada Gibbs v. Battlefords and District Co-operative Ltd. On May 1, 1996, The Supreme Court of Canada said it was discrimination for the Battlefords and District Co-operative Ltd. to differentiate between physical and mental disability in its employee disability benefits program. Betty-Lu Clara Gibbs filed a complaint against Battlefords and District Co-operative Ltd. in January 1991. Gibbs became disabled because of a mental disorder and was not able to remain in the workplace. Under the terms of an insurance policy that the employer provided, any employee who was not able to work because of a disability received replacement income. However, if the disability was a mental illness, the replacement income benefit |
would terminate after two years unless the person was in a mental institution. Had Gibbs been unable to work because of a physical disability, the income replacement benefit would have continued whether she was institutionalized or not.
In June 1992 a board of inquiry held that this constituted discrimination. The board's decision was upheld by the Court of Queen's Bench in February 1993 and the Court of Appeal in June 1994.
The Supreme Court agreed, saying that when trying to determine whether distinctions between physical and mental disabilities is discrimination, it is important to look at the purpose of the insurance plan. In this case, the Court said, the purpose of the plan was to insure employees against the income-related consequences of becoming disabled and unable to work. Consequently, when the plan limited the income replacement benefits for people with mental disabilities, that constituted discrimination. | |
...continued Early Resolution Survey Supports Process | ||
| deciding on compensation: A number of complainants (36 percent) and respondents (20 percent) indicated that they were not satisfied with the compensation they either received or paid out. Complainants thought they should have received more or they wanted an admission of wrong-doing from the respondent; respondents thought they should have paid less.
Many complainants and respondents wanted more assistance in determining the amount of compensation that was appropriate. Twenty-one percent of complainants thought the process did not help them enough with compensation; 35 percent of the respondents felt the process did not give them as much assistance as they would have liked. |
racial and sexual harassment: Of those who responded to the survey, half had complaints of racial or sexual harassment. Those complainants were asked if they thought early resolution was an appropriate way of resolving their complaints. Most of them thought it was. However, many of them indicated that they would not have tried early resolution if they had to negotiate with the respondent face-to-face. (All those who participated in the survey went through a process of "shuttle mediation," where negotiations were conducted through the facilitator.)
Donna Scott, chief commissioner/director, said that, overall, she was pleased with the results of the survey. "We now are confident that the process is beneficial for most complainants and respondents." She said the survey was valuable, as well, in highlighting areas where improvements could be made. |
|
Previous Page | Cover Page | Home | Next Page