While the court found that the employer had prima
facie discriminated against the complainant on the basis of family status, the matter was remitted to the arbitrator to determine whether the employer had met its duty to accommodate her to the point of undue hardship.
Indeed, by refusing to recongize TWU students as potential lawyers, based on the religious tenets of TWU, they are prima -
facie discriminating on the basis of their religion.
Not exact matches
Adverse Impact: The Tribunal established a case of prima
facie discrimination under section 14, which prohibits any «occupational association» (meaning any organization in which membership is a prerequisite to carrying on a trade, occupation or profession) from expelling or suspending any member, or (otherwise)
discriminating against any person or member because of physical or mental disability.
In finding that the applicant had not been
discriminated against on the basis of sex or family status the Honourable Justice Johanne Trudel directed her attention to the four factors necessary to establish a prima
facie case of discrimination on the basis of family status.
Once the employee has established prima
facie discrimination, the employer then has the opportunity to prove that it did not
discriminate against the claimant, such as by demonstrating that the employer would experience undue hardship if it were to provide the employee with the accommodation sought.
Prior decisions such as Entrop, and the Court of Queen's Bench ruling in Kellogg, Brown & Root held that there was a prima
facie case of discrimination because the employer
discriminated against all drug users on the ground of a» perceived disability».
Since the employee could establish a prima
facie case of discrimination by proving that a) she had, or was perceived to have, a disability, b) she received adverse treatment, and c) her disability was a factor in the adverse treatment, the employee's allegation that the employer
discriminated against her on the basis of disability when they terminated her employment was upheld.
The court observed that a prima
facie case of discrimination required Spath to show that: (1) she was «disabled» under the ADA; (2) she was qualified, with or without reasonable accommodation, to perform the functions of her job; and (3) Berry
discriminated against her in regard to advancement, discharge, compensation, or other terms of employment.