Category Archives: Resources

Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck LLP/s.r.l. represented Bronwyn Cruden, a Canadian International Development Agency (“CIDA”) aid worker and member of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (“PSAC”) before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

Ms Cruden filed a complaint with the Tribunal in 2008 against CIDA and Health Canada after being denied a field posting in Afghanistan because she had Type 1 Diabetes. Despite her status as a “rising star” within CIDA and having successfully completed physical examinations and independent specialized medical assessments deeming her fit for posting, Health Canada refused to recommend her for medical clearance. CIDA, which has the authority to overrule Health Canada recommendations, refused to post her to Afghanistan or to provide suitable accommodation. Health Canada’s policy prohibits federal government employees with Type 1 diabetes from being posted to Afghanistan and other regions deemed to be “hostile”. Ms Cruden seeks to change the policy and receive compensation for lost wages and opportunities.

The hearing was held from January 17 to February 3, 2011. Bronwyn Cruden was represented by Alison Dewar and Erin O’Hara.

James Cameron to Speak at OBA Conference on Harassment Investigations

James Cameron will be speaking at an Ontario Bar Association program entitled Harassment Investigations: Pitfalls, Best Practices and New Approaches on Thursday, March 25, 2010.

James will be speaking from the perspective of an employee representative in harassment investigations, and will address issues including:

How do harassment policies fit with related legislation and regulations?
What are the procedural fairness requirements for harassment investigations?
How should privacy/confidentiality issues be dealt with in the investigation process?
What are the most common errors in an investigation, and what are the best practices?
What are the viable alternatives for fixing dysfunctional workplaces without conducting a major investigation, and when are they most effective?

Visit the OBA website for more information.

FCA Confirms Adjudicator’s Right to Enforce Settlement Agreements

The Federal Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Amos v. Attorney General of Canada, affirming the jurisdiction of an Adjudicator appointed under the Public Service Labour Relations Act to enforce a settlement agreement entered into by the parties to an adjudicable grievance.

In allowing Andrew Amos’ appeal, the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that the Adjudicator’s decision was supported by the PSLRA’s increased emphasis on the voluntary resolution of disputes and Parliament’s intention that the Act provide an exclusive and comprehensive regime for resolving grievances. In doing so, the Court of Appeal agreed that case law under the previous PSSRA no longer applied, rejecting the Respondent’s argument that the grievor’s recourse was limited to presenting a new, non-adjudicable grievance to the employer.

Mr. Amos was represented by Andrew Raven and Andrew Astritis. The full text of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision is available here.

RCBY Recognizes National Day of Mourning

Click here for more information on events in communities across Ontario.

On April 28, people across the globe pause to pay respects to their brothers and sisters who have died or been injured at work.

Just over twenty years ago, the Canadian Labour Congress declared the date a Day of Mourning; a date that is now observed in over 100 countries.

In Canada, in 2008, there were at least two deaths per day on the job, and nearly a million workplace injuries.

By spreading the word, we hope to encourage remembrance, recognition of the issues, and the promotion of safe and healthy workplaces.

RavenLaw Sponsors Ottawa Folk Festival – September 4-8, 2013

Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck is proud to continue its sponsorship of the Ottawa Folk Festival for a fourth consecutive year. This year Folk Festival Participants will be able to see many fabulous acts on the RavenLaw stage.

Set amidst the natural beauty of Hog’s Back Park, the Ottawa Folk Festival is a four-day celebration of music, dance, visual arts and community featuring an eclectic mix of musical performances on two evening and five daytime stages, plus participatory music workshops, special children’s and family performances, beer gardens, artisan and craft vendors, and much more. Given our work with employees and unions in labour and human rights matters, it is a pleasure to support artists who share our passion for and commitment to social justice and equality.

For further information about this year’s festival, including tickets and schedule, please visit http://ottawafolk.com/

2010 Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck LLP Prize in Human Rights Awarded

We are very proud to announce that Michelle Gordon has been awarded this year’s Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck LLP Prize in Human Rights at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law, Common Law Section.

Every year, our firm sponsors a prize for the student who achieves the highest standing in the “Human Rights Laws in Canada” course at the law school. Human rights law is a fundamental component of our legal system and a major component of our law practice. It is important to recognize achievements in this area, and to encourage students to pursue human rights law when they practice.

Congratulations Michelle, and best of luck in your legal career!

Pay Equity: Supreme Court of Canada allows PSAC’s Appeal

Our firm recently represented the Public Service Alliance of Canada (“PSAC”) in an appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada regarding the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s 2005 decision to uphold PSAC’s pay equity complaint against Canada Post.

In a rare ruling from the bench, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal, reinstating the Tribunal’s decision against Canada Post. The complaint, presented in 1983, resulted in a long-fought legal battle by PSAC, first to have the case referred to Tribunal and then to see the matter through the adjudicative process, which included over 400 hearing days spanning ten years. The award for lost wages and the interest thereon is estimated to be worth approximately $250 million.

The Supreme Court’s decision has significant implications for both the individuals involved and the pay equity jurisprudence under the Canadian Human Rights Act. In endorsing wholesale the dissenting reasons set out by Justice Evans at the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court re-affirmed the validity of the 1986 Equal Wages Guidelines, including the gender predominance thresholds set out therein. The Supreme Court also confirmed the Tribunal’s decision to accept the expert evidence tendered by PSAC, which demonstrated that Canada Post had failed to pay workers in the female-dominated CR Group equal pay for work of equal value performed by the male-dominated PO Group.

Congratulations to PSAC for this hard-fought and important victory!

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Renders Groundbreaking Decision On Family Status

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal recently released its groundbreaking decision in Johnstone v. Canada Border Services Agency. In its ruling, the Tribunal held that Fiona Johnstone’s employer failed to accommodate her family status obligations and, in particular, her need to provide child care for her children.

Fiona Johnstone, a Border Service Officer with the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), requested a fixed shift schedule to allow her to arrange child care for her child. Like her husband, who also works at CBSA, Mrs Johnstone worked an irregular rotating shift schedule – 24 hours a day, seven days a week – which made it impossible to find a child care provider. The employer stated that it would provide a static shift for Mrs Johnstone, but forced her into part-time status.

Mrs Johnstone presented a complaint in 2004 under theCanadian Human Rights Act, which was ultimately referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for a hearing. Mrs Johnstone was supported throughout this process by her union, the Public Service Alliance of Canada.

In its defence, the employer argued that the test for family status discrimination should be higher than that of other grounds of discrimination. In particular, the employer argued that family status discrimination should only be found where there is a “serious interference” with a “substantial parental obligation.” Mrs Johnstone, with legal representation from our firm, maintained that the threshold for demonstrating discrimination in a family status case should be no different than for any other ground of discrimination. The Tribunal agreed with Mrs Johnstone, stating that “an individual should not have to tolerate some amount of discrimination to a certain unknown level before being afforded the protection of theAct.” The Tribunal found that Mrs Johnstone had established aprima facie case of discrimination.

The Tribunal also rejected the employer’s argument that it would suffer undue hardship if it was required to accommodate Mrs Johnstone. In particular, the Tribunal rejected the employer’s submission that there would be health and safety concerns associated with Mrs Johnstone working 13-hour shifts and also rejected the expert evidence tendered by the employer that providing accommodation to Mrs Johnstone would open the floodgates to other requests for family status accommodation at CBSA. The Tribunal noted that, other than the expert report that was prepared for litigation and expressly rejected by the Tribunal, the employer had undertaken no analysis or consultations concerning the possibility of accommodating Mrs Johnstone’s child care needs.

The Tribunal ruled that CBSA’s conduct was willful and reckless in depriving Mrs Johnstone of her employment opportunities. The Tribunal ordered CBSA to pay Mrs Johnstone for lost wages and pension benefits, as well as damages totalling $35,000.

The full text of the Tribunal’s decision is available here.

2012 Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck Human Rights/Social Justice Internship