For example, in British Columbia Maritime Employers Assn. International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Local 500 (Dhillon Grievance), the arbitrator found that the employer was not required to allow employees to work in positions without a hard hat where one was required by policy.
In this case, the employer’s process for accommodating such employees by providing them access to other jobs (even if those jobs were preferred positions) satisfied its duty to accommodate.
Essentially, an employer must provide a workplace that recognizes the differences in a diverse society.
If employees are adversely affected because of a proscribed ground, an employer must seek to “accommodate” those employees to the point of undue hardship.
While most of these differences present themselves without difficulty, occasionally, workplace rules or managerial perceptions can restrict the ability of certain employees to perform job tasks.For example, in disability cases, an employer must obtain information about the employee’s medical limitations, the prognosis for recovery and the ability of the employee to perform other tasks.Increasing diversity within an organization helps it to mirror the society in which it operates.A robust, diverse workforce provides employers with a resource to engage with the public in a real and practical fashion.
In these situations, an employer may be faced with a duty to accommodate those employees.The “duty to accommodate” flows from courts’ interpretation of Human Rights legislation.