Accommodation

[[Category:

Dixon v. 930187 Ontario, 2010 HRTO 256 (CanLII)

[38] A respondent is not required to accommodate past the point of undue hardship, and sometimes, little or no accommodation may be possible. However, the person with a duty to accommodate must make a real effort to accommodate Code-related needs. Accommodation is a collaborative process: the person with a duty to accommodate is required to actively seek the information he or she needs, and must be prepared to consider and explore the possibilities. The person requiring accommodation must also cooperate in the attempt to find a suitable accommodation.

[39] The Supreme Court of Canada has accepted that the duty to accommodate has both a substantive and procedural component; see British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 176 D.L.R. (4th) 1, 1999 CanLII 652 (S.C.C.) (hereafter “Meiorin”), and British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) v. British Columbia (Council of Human Rights), 1999 CanLII 646 (SCC), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 868, 36 C.H.R.R. D/129, at paras. 22 and 42–45. To meet the procedural part of the duty to accommodate, the respondent must take adequate steps to explore what accommodation is needed, and to assess accommodation options. That involves obtaining all relevant information about the applicant’s situation, at least where it is readily available.

[40] In Lane v. ADGA Group Consultants Inc., 2007 HRTO 34 (CanLII) the Tribunal held that a failure to meet the procedural dimensions of the duty to accommodate — the duty to inquire and assess — is a form of discrimination in itself because it denies the affected person the benefit of the prohibition against discrimination, and a proper search for accommodation. The Tribunal’s decision was confirmed on appeal: ADGA Group Consultants Inc. v. Lane, 2008 CanLII 39605 (ON S.C.D.C.).