The Court released its judgment in Schrenk v BC Human Rights Tribunal, a case about the scope of human rights protections against
discriminatory harassment in the workplace.
Not exact matches
In life, a hostile work environment can occur due to
workplace conduct which is contrary to your comfort and peace of mind as an employee and is caused by some type of unfair discrimination or
discriminatory harassment.
In its submission to the Court, West Coast LEAF argued that limiting the scope of human rights protections against
discriminatory harassment — as the BC Court of Appeal did — turns back the clock on 30 years of
workplace equality rights.
Employees
in a
workplace in which others are subject to sexual
harassment or
in a «poisoned work environment» (one
in which an ongoing culture of sexualized,
discriminatory and harassing behaviours is pervasive) can experience negative consequences similar to those the target experiences despite not being the target themselves.
To demonstrate the significance of her initial «no, thanks» and his subsequent refusal to accept it from another perspective: if Betty and Jones were coworkers
in the same office, if he continued to solicit her after being told no the first time, that would be the definition of sexual
harassment on his part and it would not matter how genial or friendly or casual he thinks he's being; furthermore, if her
workplace failed to intervene on her behalf, they would be engaging
in sexually
discriminatory behavior by creating a hostile work environment, regardless of how genial / friendly / casual, etc..