in one of my classes today, organizational behaviours, we were discussing values and attitudes in employment. in another class i have, employment law, we have been discussing human rights in employment. in employment, according to the human rights code, an employer is not allowed to discriminate based on 14 prohibited grounds. these grounds are: race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, ethnic origin, age (over 18), disability, creed, marital status, family status or record of pardoned offences. there are some exceptions to these grounds.. one of which is called a bona fide occupational requirement... this would be for example: a womens shelter may require an employee to be a women. if a man were to go to court about this and say that he was discriminated against because of his gender.. this womens shelter can legally say that yes he was discriminated against but it is necessary for the job that the position be filled by a female. makes sense right? i think so.
an employer can however, discriminate against physical appearance.. if you have a bunch of tattoos or piercings showing.. they can choose not to hire you. physical appearance (whether it be thinness or obesity, hair colour or height) is not protected from discrimination. employers must be careful however, because some physical appearances, like nose piercings, may be tied to one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination (i wont get into that though).
in addition, there is this whole legal thing of "just cause" (legal terminology is still beyond me). but basically it means you can fire an employee for misconduct. this i understand, as long as it interferes with work or possibly even values of the job (example, drug use during work, or the drug use of an addictions counsellor). but what if you do something on your own personal time, that has nothing to do with any values of your job, and this information leaks out.. is it misconduct.
here:
a complaint was filed against a judge in manitoba (practicing family law). the reason for the complaint: there were nude photos of her leaked on the internet. someone saw these photos and basically decided to argue that "the presence of these photos on the internet raises issues about her ability to perform as a judge". in the nude photos she was with her husband. the nude photos of her contained various poses and some while engaging in "sexual acts". now can someone explain to me how this "raises issues about her ability to perform as a judge"? no it doesn't! she can have her own personal life right? the women was with her husband (who im hoping she trusts)! this was on her personal time in her own house, she had no idea the photos would get leaked.. how is this "misconduct" in relation to her job? is there no separation between a job and your personal life? i mean, yeah.. maybe she shouldn't have had pictures taken of herself naked..i guess you could argue that.. but since when can you base firing someone on naivety when it comes to personal matters? would the same complaints be made if it was a male judge?
thats my stance.. do you see this the same way? enlighten me.. please.
have a good weekend!
No comments:
Post a Comment