Sentences with phrase «rights act only»
As set out in more detail on our page concerning which laws apply, the Canadian Human Rights Act only applies to a very small subset of workers in Ontario.
http://www.ottawaemploymentlaw.com/ Not exact matches
The right workers in the right role can transform an entire department — maybe even an entire organization — but only if their ability to act on their intuition and creativity is unleashed.
Although enforcement of the Equal Pay Act and other civil rights laws has helped to narrow the gender pay gap, these actions only cover segments of the American working population, and many important protections are not yet codified in law.
You're right about the main reason, but that's because most people don't understand the purpose of Absolute Return investments is to diversify a portfolio — not act as a substitute for long - only equity exposure (which as you say can be obtained very cheaply)
In normal times, Section 18 of the Act says the Bank can only buy (or sell) certain types of assets — coins, foreign currencies, federal and provincial / territorial debt, debt issued by the U.S., Japan or the European Union, International Monetary Fund (IMF) special drawing rights, and bills of exchange or promissory notes issued by a bank or authorized foreign bank provided they have a maturity of no more than 180 days.
Most provinces and territories also have pay equity provisions in their human rights statutes, but the Alberta Human Rights Act, RSA 2000, c A - 25.5 is deficient in not mandating equal pay for work of equal value, only for «the same or substantially similar work» (s 6 (1); see also Lrights statutes, but the Alberta Human Rights Act, RSA 2000, c A - 25.5 is deficient in not mandating equal pay for work of equal value, only for «the same or substantially similar work» (s 6 (1); see also LRights Act, RSA 2000, c A - 25.5 is deficient in not mandating equal pay for work of equal value, only for «the same or substantially similar work» (s 6 (1); see also Lahey).
I'd like to believe that my good deeds and my bad deeds are acts of invisible men... but I can't help but feel empowered by my one and only REAL RIGHT and REAL FREEDOM, free choice.
They are only acting there first amendment rights.
If I am wrong then so be it but I bet half of you, if not most, watch TV shows like Bachelorette and Big Brother which it's ok to act like they do ONLY if they are Christians right?
Right, just because it's in the bible and the people who commited some of those acts were not only never punished but still considered Gods faithful servants, shouln't be any sort of quide on what the bible allows.
While only about 50 people came to the Westwood Hills fundraising event, it would only take the right person in this town to see the act and put it on television.
Pius XII, in a further clarification of the standard argument, holds that when the State, acting by its ministerial power, uses the death penalty, it does not exercise dominion over human life but only recognizes that the criminal, by a kind of moral suicide, has deprived himself of the right to life.
Nevertheless it must also be emphasized that such law is not left to the arbitrary will of the authorities only because it exists by custom or by a legal act and is therefore of human, not divine right.
Still, the case against teleological ethics may here offer this response: Granting the difference between direct and indirect applications, this yields only the familiar distinction between «act - teleology» and «rule - teleology, «3 is problematic for the following reason: Social practices or patterns of social cooperation can not be validated teleologically without a comparative assessment of the good and evil consequences differing possible systems of rules or norms (for instance, differing sets of rights) are likely, if adopted, to produce.
On Apel's account, these rights articulate the valid meaning that can be given to the second formulation of Kant's categorical imperative: «So act as to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end withal, never as means only» (46).
The 1998 act passed because a remarkable coalition of Jews and Christians was prepared to do battle not only with the foreign policy mandarins but also with oldline liberal churches and secular human rights organizations who complained that concern for persecuted Christians is an instance of «special pleading.»
Americans are slow to adapt and are defly afraid of change, see how the african american community is stiill only allowed to vote under the voting rights act of 1965 (that's right, it still not a law) Why are they not up in arms,,,,, «yet we have a black president... maybe you can take a page from their book (passive aggression).
Only in a society that believed in the Eternal could it be right to act as if this finite life were not everything.
Byron is generally harmless until controversy happens, and his «one and only book» learning and simple experience with war gives him the apparent right to act with indiscriminate prejudice.
As Pope John XXIII wrote in his encyclical Pacem in Terris (1963), «Any government which refused to recognize human rights, or acted in violation of them, would not only fail in its duty; its decrees would be wholly lacking in binding force.»
When the nation was established as a democratic republic, the people of the former English colonies, acting in their various constitutional conventions, transferred all governing power to their states and to the federal government, reserving for themselves only certain rights and powers they previously claimed to enjoy as subjects of the British Crown.
I am now ready to argue that the Christian belief in a God who acts in history entails the belief that God has aims for institutions and that a nation or a church, or even a garden club, is in right relationship to God only when its aims are identical with his.
Fixing the Affordable Care Act may be possible only after its utter collapse, but conscience rights for every actor in the healthcare system can be shored up with great ease by passage of the Conscience Protection Act.
A Church has only then a right to call herself Christian Church, if she acts according to the Holy Bible.
He concluded that not only did he have every right to treat his speculative interest as worth acting on; it appeared, also, sometimes to be derived from past reality.
Civil rights do not depend on religious beliefs / opinions... legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others.
Your other comments are right that money rather wasted on killing mankind rather than feeding them and spreading peace and such acts only deprive the majority of people from their money infavour of minority who enjoys the earnings of wars.
«Autonomy» is a term invoked to justify not only any sexual choice a person may make but, as we see in Belgium, the right to euthanasia, particularly through suicide which is regarded as the ultimate autonomous act.
Hartshorne is no less clear in his acceptance of a teleological, experiential ethics: «If we know what experience is, at its best or most beautiful, then and only then can we know how it is right to act; for the value of action is in what it contributes to experiences» (AMV 303).
More commonly and subtly, a mental disorder may so distort an individual's beliefs that he may think he is doing right when in fact an act is terribly wrong - as, for example, when a person has the delusion that his wife has literally turned into a zombie and that shooting her is the only way to protect himself from being eaten alive, or an inpatient attacks the attendants on his ward when they come to take him to an appointment because he believes they are alien beings sent to kill him.
Especially since he's right, that we should be looking to resolve the shameful past of our western world or we only look like hypocrites when we criticise others for their shameful acts.
Byrne Dairy Web sites will disclose your personal information, without notice, only if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to: (a) conform to the edicts of the law or comply with legal process served on Byrne Dairy or the site; (b) protect and defend the rights or property of Byrne Dairy; and, (c) act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Byrne Dairy, or the public.
Non-GMO Project hereby grants you a non-exclusive, revocable license to use the Website and any materials provided via the website solely for Your own personal use, subject to and as set forth in this Agreement only upon the express condition that You accept each provision of this Agreement and provided that: (i) you will not reproduce, copy, distribute, or make derivative works of the Website, the Standard (except for the limited right to download a personal copy of the Standard), or any other materials form the Website, in any medium without Non-GMO Project's prior written consent; (ii) you will not alter or modify any part of the Website other than as may be reasonably necessary to use the Website for its intended purposes; and (iii) you will otherwise act in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement and in accordance with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.
we only drew Spurs, we need to get our act right and beat United we dnt even need a draw.
Not only did his crosses not arrive he also made poor decisions and was out of position often, combine that with a Theo who acted like Ozil on a bad day and nothing really good came from our right side.
This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits
Although I've found it very cathartic to speak, vent and end occasionally rant about all things Arsenal, we need to act carefully and intelligently right now or we're going to get played by this club even worse than at present... the pro-Wengerites and the suits, who represent a considerable proportion of the season ticket holders, don't want to believe that there is no plan and that Wenger has mailed it in for several years now or that things are going to get much worse before they get better... why would they... many have spent a considerable sum buying some of the highest priced tickets in the World... they want to have a front row seat to see something special and to be seen doing so, which simply provides ample justification for the expense and the time invested... to many of them, Wenger is the sun in their soccer universe... his awkward disposition, misplaced arrogance and his utter lack of balls makes him a rather unusual cult figure, but the cerebral narrative seemed to embolden those who already felt pretty highly of themselves... many might not even of really liked football that much before his arrival and rarely games they weren't attending... as such, they desperately believe that Wenger, and only Wenger, can supply them with their required fix... if he goes, they were wrong and that's a tough pill to swallow... they would have to admit that they were duped... they will definitely resent whoever made them feel this way, but of course it will be too late by then... so when we go overboard with ridiculous comments bordering of anarchy, it scares the shit out of them and they shift their blame towards us rather than at those who really perpetrated this act of treason... we aren't the enemy... we simply woke much earlier and the reason our comments have gotten more vile in recent years is out of utter frustration... in order for any real change to occur at this club we need to bring as many supporters as possible with us or the big money interests will fade and our ultimate objective will be lost... so it's time to focus on the head instead of the heart for now
But please don't act like your right to watch this mess or be offended by him kneeling at the flag is any different or less than my right to not support this trash or feel offended when I see that nfl owners only care about black and brown people when they are smashing their heads against each other.
Challenge Success websites will disclose your personal information, without notice, only if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to: (a) conform to the edicts of the law or comply with legal process served on Challenge Success or the site; (b) protect and defend the rights or property of Challenge Success; and, (c) act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of Challenge Success, or the public.
Before I had a kid on my own, I imagined that somehow only kids that are spoiled are the ones that cry, act out and throw tantrums and that maybe their parents didn't have the right approach or the appropriate attitude to fix the issue or teach the kid that that's not right..
While Civil Rights in the USA means far more than racial equality only, it is common to use the term synonomously with racial equality because that was the driving force behind the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
But the party conference season has only served to fan the flames of their spat over the future of the Human Rights Act.
Several months later, the DWP went back to court to argue that the first tier tribunal only had the power to identify that legislation is incompatible with the Human Rights Act - not to rule on a case on that basis.
Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer, a Yonkers Democrat, said during a CapTon interview that Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has been outspoken in his support of abortion rights, should pressure the Senate Republicans to codify Roe v. Wade in state law by including the tenth plank of his erstwhile Women's Equality Act — the only plank the GOP - controlled Senate has refused to pass — in this year's budget.
It is only right that we should put the toughest possible sanctions in place, make sure we stamp out unfair practices and deter those who are looking to act dishonestly.
Only a renewed pledge today to bring in Britain's first Bill of Rights and scrap the Human Rights Act — delayed from last year — is likely to spark any impassioned debate.
In paragrpah 2 of Anas's reply to Amidu Wednesday, he wrote: «Mr. Amidu is right in one, and only one, respect: a company limited by shares, such as we are, is required to state its name with the suffix «Limited» or «Ltd.» Section 15 of the Companies Act is taught to every student of Company Law in this country.»
A tireless civil rights advocate, he was one of only 67 with the gumption to vote no when the Defense of Marriage Act came up in 1996 — versus 342 who embraced the anti-gay measure.
The LGBT groups endorsed the proposed city Right To Know Act that would require NYPD officers to inform anyone they stop that under normal circumstances ---- that is, without a specific indication of criminal behavior ---- they can only be searched with their consent.
There is something fundamentally wrong with a state that is so grossly overcentralised (above all, when it comes to the affairs of England) and has such an overmighty executive, restrained only by judges implementing the Human Rights Act, unelected lords and journalists.