If it wasn't so incredibly serious, what a truly pathetic joke this is. Fire ALL of the "Human Rights" apparatchiks!!!

I will second that Robert!

"The Superior Court struck down the “fatally flawed” decision as so unfair to defendant Maxcine Telfer — who represented herself in the hearing — that it was “simply not possible to logically follow the pathway taken by the adjudicator.”"

Telfer probably made the mistake of assuming that the truth was a defense, and that logical argument would be admissible in the hearing.

"I am a little bit surprised and a little bit confused about how the justice system works,” Saadi said."

Me too...
(Actually, make that 'Legal System'; no indication of Justice in the original hearing.)

Rhetorical question: What sanctions will be meted out to the folks who made the "fatally flawed decision?"

What sanctions? Probably a promotion sideways to get them out of the public eye. Pay rise, of course.

OK, so obviously the Muslim Brotherhood has taken over the HRCs. So what are we going to about that? Are we just a barbaric culture incapable of democracy? (sarc)

We are being hypocritical when we say the Middle East is not capable of democracy. Are we capable of democracy?

The enemy within, the progressive elitists, whose collectivist Koran (disguised as the Charter of Rights) robs our individualism every day and what do we do about it? Start a million man march? How about a wee Tea Party …nada. No, we just point fingers at the rabble in the Middle East and smugly state how beneath us they are for not having a great democracy like Canada does. Yet we allow this HRC circus to continue. We’re a pontificating bunch of wimps.

What is the hierarchy within the HRC? who trumps what, I know where I stand towards the back of the bus.

Why isn't the idiot adjudicator named in the story?

This has got to stop once & for all.
Let the Conservatives know there chances as a Party ride on this Issue. They have avoided it & avioded it again. Lets hold their toes to the fire of unemployment, if they don't act on these inequities immediately..
This Inquisition is ever more insane.
Time to kill it . Starve it of any cash from any department.

This is such an "own goal" for muslims in Canada that it's beyond words.

Why would ANYONE want to hire a muslim knowing that they put themselves at risk for this kind of idiocy?

" “I feel vindicated,” said Telfer, who owns Audmax Inc., a company that gets federal government money to provide job training to immigrant women."

So ironic.

The HRTO adjudicator was Faisal Bhabha,Vice-chair with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

Not some rogue rookie adjudicator. This disgraceful ruling came right from the top.

Junkie at 5:20
Why isn't the idiot adjudicator named in the story?

Could be government or Union policy. How convenient.

RD,the Conservatives have been strangely silent on the HRT/HRC's.I've E-mailed my MP on the HRC's,and was thanked for my input.

I assume it's because they recognize what a powerful weapon HRC's can be and realize that THEY might have use for them some time.

With any of the other guys in power,HRC's would probably have their scope increased. It's good to see a real Court send them back to the drawing board.

Un-bloody believable!

(from OHRT adjudicator Faisal Bhabha)

Microwave policy

[40] The applicant alleged that the office microwave policy had an adverse discriminatory effect on her on the basis of race, ethnic origin, ancestry and place of origin. Specifically, she argued that the policy, which allowed the heating of some foods, effectively operated as a ban on heating foods with an ethnically identifiable odour, without providing the opportunity to be accommodated. The applicant was held in violation of the policy on at least two occasions.

[41] There are three aspects of this policy for me to consider. First, there were two versions of a written policy admitted into evidence. Secondly, there was the policy as articulated by Ms. Telfer in the office in communications with staff, about which there is conflicting oral evidence. Finally, there is the issue of the interpretation and enforcement of the policy. Any rule or standard can be applied in a discriminatory manner if certain individuals are singled out for enforcement on the basis of a Code-protected ground. The applicant argued that she was singled out for discriminatory enforcement on the basis of an intersection of her race, ancestry, ethnic origin and place of origin.

[42] The written policy, dated September 18, 2001, titled “Health and Safety Concerns” deals with environmental sensitivity in the office. It asks employees to:

Please refrain from or strictly limit the use of scented deodorants, perfumes, colognes, shampoos.

It goes on to state:

Due to food allergies and odour from some food, please refrain from or strictly limit the use of the Microwave [sic] for foods that present same. The most commonly reported of these types of reactions have occurred as a result of seafood-allergic people inhaling odors [sic] from cooking or reheating certain foods. [emphasis added]

[43] In an updated version of the same policy, dated January 2, 2005, the only notable change is in the last sentence reproduced above, and the addition of a new, incomplete, sentence. The updated version reads:

The most commonly reported of these types of reactions have occurred as a result of reheating certain foods, seafood-allergic and peanut allergic. Ways of harzards [sic] people inhaling odors [sic] from cooking or. [sic] [emphasis added]

[44] It is clear from the written policy that the reheating of food was permitted and that staff were being asked to be sensitive to odours of “certain” foods that can trigger allergies, namely seafood allergies and, in the updated policy, peanut allergies. The policy failed to provide any specific guidance as to which “certain” foods run afoul of the policy.

[45] I accept the view of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in Chauhan v. Norkam Seniors Housing Cooperative Assn., 2004 BCHRT 262, at para. 126 that the preparation of cooked foods in one’s home is an expression of ethnicity and ancestry. While the workplace is a different environment than one’s home, the connection between food and one’s ancestry is a deeply personal one that goes to the heart of the Code’s dignity-enhancing purpose. A policy permitting the heating of some foods but not others, without adequate clarity about what constitutes acceptable ingredients and without providing a discernable rationale for the rule, creates the conditions for arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement.

[46] Nothing in the evidence suggests that the respondents deliberately targeted the applicant for discriminatory enforcement of the microwave policy. However, the applicant argued that she was adversely affected by the enforcement of the policy. The evidence establishes that other staff members, who had previously used the microwave, ceased using it completely as a result of Ms. Telfer’s vigorous enforcement of the policy. The applicant continued to use it and testified that she attempted to comply with the policy by not heating overly odorous foods.

[47] I find that the microwave policy was a moving target that was virtually impossible to comply with, unless one refrained from using it entirely. In her testimony, Ms. Telfer acknowledged that it would be difficult to list which foods would fall within the policy and which would run afoul. She said it was a matter of “trial and error. You don’t know until you smell.”

[48] In a diverse workplace serving members of the public from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, such ambiguity leads to arbitrariness and the conditions for discriminatory enforcement. To the extent that the applicant was disciplined for her violations of the microwave policy, and that those violations constituted a factor in her termination, I find she was discriminated against on the basis of her ancestry and ethnic origin.

A college of mine worked in very close proximity to someone whose nationality will remain nameless; but who's lunch and hygiene literally made this college sick. Only after his 'incident' did our employer seek to accommodate the person who's senses were being assaulted. And complaints had been made about this smelly person by numerous other employees. I wonder if the very act of 'throwing-up' is a punishable HRC offense in it self.

Interestingly enough, my employer was quick to ban microwave popcorn because of a complaint that someone got head aches from the smell. I would think that microwave popcorn should be considered very ethnic for my Caucasian culture. After all, I was raised on the stuff, my kids were raised on the stuff, and so on...(btw, don't get me started on P&B and ethnic foods).

Trying to get her house seized, jesus wept am I the only one who sees absolute greed amongst many of the complainants? Personally I'd appeal their stupid decision, let real judges articulate why an employee of six weeks should get a cash settlement for being offended?

So, the complainant was ordered to pay legal costs of about $10,000, but the Legal Centre is going to pay those for her??? There are absolutely no sanctions against the complainant for a ridiculous and frivolous decision to sue??

The results in this story are very similar to the results of the 'death taxes' in the USA. Many people (especially farmers) who've inherited an estate are often forced to sell the property of that estate (ie houses & farms) to cover the taxes after death. In my view, in both cases, this is the government confiscating private property.

So, I think in the 'death tax' case it can be argued that the Constitutional private property rights of such a person are being violated by such a tax. Property rights are not applicable here in Canada as we all know.

I know I'm a bit off topic, but the results are still the same.

The HRTO adjudicator was Faisal Bhabha,Vice-chair with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

Not some rogue rookie adjudicator. This disgraceful ruling came right from the top.

End quote:==========

Well that explains the ruling.

All of the above. There, that is now settled, too bad the morons in the government do not get it.

Sounds like we taxpayers paid for her house in the first place. It doesn't matter much to me which ungrateful immigrant ends up living in it.

' “I am a little bit surprised and a little bit confused about how the justice system works,” Saadi said.'

...not "how" ... "that"...

Many problems in society can be solved by an impartial application of the the rule of law.

Miss Telfer's business was to help immigrant women.
Not only was the offensive party biting the hands that fed her, she was biting everyone else's hands, as well.
Why doesn't someone put human rights commissions on trial? Not only are the freedoms of expression and speech being violated, but the rights to live, work and congregate freely. Why not have a class action suit against these people? I hope the other immigrant women Miss Telfer was helping band together and sue Miss Saadi. I really do. Why should their lives be put on hold because of her?

What’s the problem here? Multi-culti “More Pavilions at Folkfest” OR empowering unqualified hicks to deliberate and decide on matters of importance. If you ignore all the funny abba dabba names involved in this case, what you’re left with is a totally unqualified and unsupervised adjudicator empowered to make highly consequential rulings.

The HRCs are completely amok, but many “local governments” eg school boards, municipalities, are empowered to be similarly abusive to their neighbours without reasonable (affordable) avenues of redress.

An employee is fired (with cause) from a small local business.

Heads to EI offices and complains. She is told she has no case as there was cause (confirmed in an interview with owners).

Heads to a lawyer to pursue a lawsuit. Told she has no case, complete waste of time and money.

Guess where she goes next....and with the story now spun a certain way, told she has a case. She does not have to pay a dime, nor would she face any repercussions. Meanwhile, the employers have had to hire a lawyer, not to mention the anxiety of possibly losing their homes and business.

I read through some of the statements and I was amazed that someone was actually considering this a human rights issue, and wasting tax dollars and court resources.

Dismantle NOW.

Bhabha, Faisal (B.A., LL.B., LL.M.)

Faisal Bhabha is listed as a researcher for the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

"Faisal Bhabha works in the areas of human rights and constitutional law. He represents clients who are disadvantaged by disability, race, gender and/or poverty in issues related to employment, education and health.

Faisal has also advised or represented numerous public interest organizations and NGOs, including Amnesty International, the University of Toronto International Human Rights Law Clinic, the National Anti-Poverty Organization, the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Canadian Muslim Civil Liberties Association, the National Anti-Racism Council of Canada, the Council of Canadians with Disabilities, and CARP – the national seniors’ association, in matters related to constitutional law and human rights.

He has published law review articles on equality, access to justice, national security and terrorism. He is also a frequent commentator in the press, having published op-eds in the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star and National Post."

Well in the "If ya can't beat them, join 'em" category . . .

she should file a Human Rights complaint against the two brain celled moron who adjudicated the original decision . . "Faisal Bhabha,Vice-chair with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario."

Go for $100k

time to skid this crap weasel.

The terrifying little detail in this case is that everyone involved has their head in the government trough. It is tantamount to an internal government bureaucratic dispute - all at taxpayer expense.

Am I the only one who can't keep track of these incestuous bureaucracies?

"On June 30, 2008, the Human Rights Code Amendment Act 2006 came into force. As of that date, all claims of discrimination under the Human Rights Code are dealt with through applications filed directly with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. The Ontario Human Rights Commission is no longer responsible for receiving discrimination complaints from individuals and then referring them to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal’s primary role is to provide an expeditious and accessible process to assist parties to resolve applications through mediation, and to decide those applications where the parties are unable to reach a resolution through settlement.
The amended Code established a new Human Rights Legal Support Centre to provide advice, support and representation for applicants, while the Commission continues to play its important public interest function."

I should file HRT complaints against the CBC, Crtc, CWB and Libranos, everything about them offends me

Anne, you hit the nail smack on the head. Hear! Hear!

Who's got time to heat up food in a microwave at work? I have bites of a sandwich between patients but taking time out to eat?

The way things work in my office is that we set the rules and the employees follow them if they want to retain their jobs. Haven't had any complaints about the policy aside from some former employees who thought the clinic was too busy. That's what happens when you work in an area where there's a permanent shortage of doctors. After seeing this idiotic case, I'm glad we've never had any muslim applicants for our MOA positions.

Mississauga Matt,

Good work exposing the hypocrisy. He needs that policy emailed to him as a reminder.

I'm with Rev on this one. This has gone on long enough - it needs to be made an election issue.

m-alta; said the same thing forever, take the Can. Wheat Board in front of the HRC, it is against my human rights to not be able to sell my grain the same as a farmer in QUEBEC or ONTARIO. Someone must do this before these quasi legal extortionists are hopefully shut down. Here in Alberta MLA Lindsay Blackett, who is also black, took a recomendation to Red ED to turf these shakedown PC artists, only to be told go back to your corner. Told Eds office it was a bad mistake, to late, now Ed will go back to the farm soon and maybe someone who doesn't take his marching orders from a millie will boot these scam artists to the same landfill as the Globull Warming SCAMsters! Time to take back govt. for the taxpayers sake.

Could someone explain to me how a Human rights tribunal can be "fair", as in the court suggesting that the plaintiff could get a fair hearing. I didn't know that fairness was part of their mandate.

mike

Phantom.. 5:16, Commissar of Windmills. It is only natural.

nomdeblog.5:18... As I have said on here before, we are now a nation of ass kissing suckholes.. Say much more on that vein and I am off to jail... The people we are growing to despise in this country, have the guns... We do not.. That's it Baby. Hasta Lavista

Maybe we should start a HRC defence fund to help "victims" of the HRC process fight back in real court ...

NERVER, EVER, EVER - Hire a Muslim in Canada!

Too much liability - too much risk.

If forced to - sell you will be better off in the long run........

unFREAKINGbelievable.

The moral of the story is refrain from having anything to do with Muslims.

Knight99- I sold my business last year, because I was sick of bureacracy, and one small factor was the ongoing loss of my right to choose who I could hire. I had no intention of ever hiring a muslim, and would have gone out of business in a heartbeat, if forced to.

I'd a be'n warming up my Pulled Pork Sandwich, just ahead of her,,,, everyday!

My (and your) ancestors when they worked in a cave did not use micro-oven to heat up the food. They use bonfire. It is our human right to start one in a cubicle! :))

That is why I have never hired anyone who wasn't like me.

Cross-posted yesterday at Blazing Cat Fur:

Blogger been around the block said...

O.M.G.

"'I feel vindicated,' said Telfer, who owns Audmax Inc., a company that gets federal government money to provide job training to immigrant women."

So, it was a Muslim woman who took Macxine Telfer to the OHRC ... hmmmmm ... why am I not surprised?

And, forgive me for pointing this out, but Macxine also happens to be black and female, which seems to have worked in her favour. When was the last time a white male representing himself had a HRC case overturned?

Boy, I'm getting tired of this gender-visible-minority-identity politics, where only certain individuals get special treatment. (The only thing I've got going for me, is that I'm a female. Otherwise, being a white Christian heterosexual can be used against me ...)

The guests in the house are ordering the owner around. Solution? Kick out obnoxious guests.

As I said over at Blazing Cat Fur, it is nice to finally have it on record that Muslim + straight + female trumps Black + straight + female in the Human Rights Commission official pecking order.

Now, as to the dreaded discriminatory microwave policy outlined above, and in keeping with the "best practices" on food allergy and health regulations I have found the solution!

NO FOOD IN THE WORKPLACE. At all. Ever.

It isn't enough to simply remove the microwave and refrigerator, because some pinhead will find a way to make that discrimination against something. You have to go whole hog, as it were. No brown bags, no coffee pot, no tea kettle, no Timmies, no Starbucks. Eat in your car or in a snowbank. Short of nuking the place from orbit, its the only way to be -sure- there are no allergic reactions you see. Added bonus, it prevents mice.

Solving the clothing issue: company Mc-uniforms! Pants, golf shirt, ball-cap. No makeup, no perfume. Condition of employment. No uniform, no paycheck.

See? Just make your business such that everything that is not required is forbidden. Leftist utopia.

Or we could JAIL the HRC for abuse of power, that would work too.

Phantom - Muslim trumps gay trumps Black trumps other minority (not counting Jewish, natch) trumps Female trumps disabled.

God this "case" p*sses me off. Thankfully it made it to a real court. These HRCs need to be abolished.

They nearly took the woman's house!?!

Hey, are any of you HRC goons reading this? How do you live with yourselves?

Mamba, next up, we find out if Muslim + gay + female trumps Muslim + straight + female. That'll be interesting.

Yes they are reading this, you may be sure. They even troll here sometimes. They are the new camp guards of our modern Canadian Values(TM) and their strength is as the strength of ten for their hearts are pure.

Plus you know, it isn't really their fault. They were just following orders.

I cannot believe the level of Islamophobic comments made here.
Why the personal assaults on an adjudicator's person? Is it because you are all so uneducated that you cannot read the decision yourselves and rely on a couple of media reports or a few lines written in this blog?
Canadians are dupes to the media and their own racism. Shame on all of you.
The judge from the Ontario Superior Court had to make up reasons to establish a 'patent unreasonable' finding to overturn the decision. It is a high standard to meet. If you want to talk about identity politics, how about we delve into our judicial system, which some of you see as the 'real' system to ensure justice.

Chris>

“I cannot believe the level of Islamophobic comments made here........ Is it because you are all so uneducated.”

Is Islamophobic even a real word, or did you just make it up with all your education? Possibly you yourself “rely on a couple of media reports”.

A Phobia is an irrational fear while no fear of real dangers is a clear symptom of Autism.

My comments about never hiring a Muslim would be “Islamophobic” as you put it, if I had an irrational fear of hiring a Muslim because no harm could come out of it. The facts and historical precedence set by the CHRC prove that taking on a Muslim as an employer is dangerous to your business and personal finances. That is not an irrational fear, it is a proven danger therefore not phobic in the least. Read more actual CHRC rulings, or Ezra Levant’s book “Shakedown”.

The same rationality would apply to all countries and people that have problems with Muslims from labor policies to border wars. Are the people of Thailand really “Islamophobic” with the cross border Muslim bombings and murders? Russia, India, Philippines, Sudan, Israel, to name a few others with similar phobic disorders.

Why in Western countries would it be “Islamophobic” to not want mass rioting and carbeques in the streets as does France? The epidemic gang rapes in Sweden & Norway by way of ‘muslim youth” seems to be an irrational fear these days.

Your hit and run smear tactics have no value here.