The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

COACH: Another Human Rights Violator

by David Doorey November 20, 2008
written by David Doorey November 20, 2008

A student of mine gave me a job application form from a company called Coach, an American company wit stores in Toronto and some other Canadian cities.  It apparently sells purses, shoes, and various accessories.  Like our good friends at Starbucks, Coach is not very knowledgeable of Canadian human rights laws as they apply to the recruitment process.  Like Starbucks, Coach claims to be an ‘equal opportunity’ employer that hires “without regard to race, sex, national origin, color, age, disability, veteran status, pregnancy, sexual orientation, religion or any other basis prohibited by applicable law”.
So, let’s play my favorite game:  Find the illegal questions and requirements:
1.  Have you been convicted of a felony crime or theft-related misdemeanor in the last 5 years?  If yes, give details.

Strike One:   It is unlawful to ask whether someone has been convicted of a crime, unless you a lso add “for which a pardon has not been granted”.  That’s because the Ontario Human Rights Code prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of ‘record of offense’ if the person has received a pardon.
2.  Provide your social insurance number.
Strike Two:   This could disclose national origin or citizenship.
3.  Provide the name and address of your high school.
Strike Three:  For the same reasons I described in my Starbucks posting, an employer cannot ask applicants where they went to high school.   It tends to disclose national origin.  
4.   You agree that Coach can conduct personal interviews with “friends, neighbours, schools, landlords, financial institutions, friends about your ‘character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living”
Are you kidding me!  This is a job working as a retail clerk, right?  Beyond the general offensiveness of an employer dispatching managers to interrogate friends and neighbours about the ‘general character’ of applicants, what do you think they mean by ‘mode of living’?  What if this snooping leads the employer to learn that the applicant is living with someone of the same sex, for example, or is married (or not married), or has children (or doesn’t).   Sending someone to ask neighbours  questions that the employer could not ask the applicant personally does not avoid the Human Rights Code.  
Of course, what is happening in this Coach application form is that the company is simply using its American forms for Canadian recruitment.  This shows an extreme lack of respect for the laws of the host country, and for all applicants who might be asked to complete this illegal form.
Finally, the Coach application form also grants Coach the right to complete extensive credit searches of applicants.   Do you think employers should be permitted to do this?   Check out this useful discussion of employee privacy issues by the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic.
Please send me any other illegal application forms you come across.  

5 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Fraser v. Ontario: Court Finds Ontario Violated Charter Right to Collective Bargaining
next post
Confusion at York as Some Classes Resume

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to Follow

Law Prof. Talking #labor & #employment #law to the masses. @YorkUniversity @OsgoodeNews @LSELaw @CLJEHarvard @Jacobin @OnLaborBlog https://t.co/5V9r8VPHsh

TheLawofWork
Retweet on Twitter David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to Retweeted
josheidelson Josh Eidelson @josheidelson ·
5h

Scoop: Labor Board prosecutors have concluded Starbucks illegally refused to fairly negotiate at dozens of newly-unionized cafes across the country https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-28/starbucks-illegally-refused-to-bargain-on-zoom-nlrb-lawyer-says Starbucks’ refusal to negotiate if some workers participated via Zoom was illegal, NLRB general counsel says

Reply on Twitter 1640509028567506950 Retweet on Twitter 1640509028567506950 140 Like on Twitter 1640509028567506950 412 Twitter 1640509028567506950
Retweet on Twitter David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to Retweeted
alexisshotwell Alexis Shotwell @alexisshotwell ·
10h

This morning the president of @Carleton_U sent out a note underlining his understanding of “how painful labour disruptions can be to communities,” pleading for us to be calm and respectful and to support our students at the end of term. 1/

Reply on Twitter 1640430514627551256 Retweet on Twitter 1640430514627551256 84 Like on Twitter 1640430514627551256 242 Twitter 1640430514627551256
thelawofwork David J. Doorey🇨🇦 @TheLawofWork@mas.to @thelawofwork ·
12h

Oh fun.

‘AI is on the cusp of taking control: This is how it may all go wrong’

https://apple.news/AWvPXyT8WTVOs5byQvVk-3Q

Reply on Twitter 1640408084093779989 Retweet on Twitter 1640408084093779989 1 Like on Twitter 1640408084093779989 3 Twitter 1640408084093779989
Load More

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Newfoundland
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.