http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1177981/greater-town-of-napanee-settles-
human-rights-claim-with-disabled-residents?relation=org
In another application brought by a women who is identified as a person with a
developmental disability, an employer was found to have violated the Code by
paying her significantly less than the employees without disabilities. According to
the HRTO decision^48 :
The applicant and other general labourers with developmental
disabilities performed the same duties as the general labourers who
did not have developmental disabilities, except for tasks that required
fine skills, such as labelling wine bottles.The applicant and other general labourers with developmental
disabilities were paid a training honorarium of $1.00 per hour. After a
few years, the honorarium was increased to $1.25 per hour. The
general labourers who did not have developmental disabilities were
paid at the minimum wage level or higher.- Failure of the Service Provider in its Duty to
Accommodate
People who have been labelled with an intellectual disability are often described
as “violent, aggressive, abusive, hard to handle, flight risk” etc. or exhibiting what
is described above as “Challenging Behaviour”. As a result of the “violent” and
“dangerous” behaviours they are physically restrained, medicated, isolated,
deprived of the things they enjoy and denied service.
In ARCH’s experience, these “violent” and “dangerous” behaviours can be the
result of a failure by the service provider to accommodate the disability related
needs of the individual. The person may not communicate verbally and the
service provider fails to learn how to facilitate communication by other means
such as symbols, communication devices, gestures or touch. It may be out of
(^48) Garrie v. Janus Joan, 2012 HRTO 68 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/fpm28