EDUC 5460: Andruski v. Coquitlam School District Legal Analysis

This case study examines the legal battle of Heather Andruski against Coquitlam School District #43, focusing on her discrimination complaint under the BC Human Rights Code due to a severe dust and scent allergy. Despite an accommodation plan, Andruski claimed the school failed to provide a safe environment, leading to absences and long-term disability. The tribunal dismissed her complaint, citing the school's reasonable efforts in providing accommodation. The case underscores the ethical management required in educational institutions to ensure a discrimination-free workplace and emphasizes the importance of employers meeting requirements to build a proper defense. Desklib provides access to similar case studies and resources for students.

Running Head: BUSINESS AND CORPORATION LAW 0
Educational Management
3/9/2019
Student’s Name
EDUC 5460: Educational Management

Educational Management
1
Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Decision...........................................................................................................................................2
The connection between Theory and Practice.................................................................................3
Lesson Learned................................................................................................................................3
References........................................................................................................................................4

Educational Management
2
Introduction
The case chosen for this report is Andruski v. Coquitlam School District and another, 2015
BCHRT 74 as the same provided significance of defenses. In the given case, one of the teacher
of the Coquitlam School District #43 (“SD 43”) and Kathleen Ponsart, named Heather
Andruski made the complaint of discrimination against her employer under section 13 of the BC
Human rights code. The person had a severe allergy to dust and scents. She brought this issue
into the knowledge of her employer and in August 2010, an accommodation plan has been
developed for her.
Even after the development of the said accommodation plan, Mr. Andruski did not get the scent
free environment as required. The problem was continued. Many of the incidents happened there,
because of which the claimant had 23 absences in the school year 2012-13 and went on long-
term disability (Queensu.ca, 2019). Claimant believed that her employer will never be able to
provide a safe and appropriate workplace and made the above-mentioned complaint.
Decision
The lead question before the tribunal was to check the possibility of the success of the complaint.
In the case of Moore v. British Columbia 2012 SCC 61, the Supreme Court held that for a
successful claim, a complaint must be prima facie related to protected characteristics of
discrimination. In the studied case, the complaint was related to the protected characteristics, as
she was not getting the proper environment to work. In such a situation respondent was required
to provide the justification. The respondent stated that the same provided required

Educational Management
3
accommodation to the claimant. In addition to this, they met with the union of the claimant and
made the changes in the accommodation plan whenever it was required. They have taken all the
reasonable efforts such as replacement of soap, removal of carpet, consultation of parents of
students and staff members and many others. After considering all the defenses presented by the
respondent, the tribunal dismissed the complaint raised by Ms. Andruski as in the belief of the
same respondent performed their obligations well.
The connection between Theory and Practice
The decision given in the case is related to the educational management context and provides
that an educational institution should be managed ethically. The decision was however in the
favor of school but it provides that schools and educational institutions should act according to
the provisions of human rights law and it is the liability of the same to provide a discrimination
free workplace.
Lesson Learned
The decision of the case provided that employer should ensure the safe workplace to employees.
It is the human right of every employee to get a workplace where the same can perform the tasks.
The lesson one may get from this case is that the employer should complete the requirements at
his/her own in order to develop a proper defense. Further, the claimant is also required to check
the validity and possibility of success of the claim. In my leadership and management, I will
always ensure to check the eligibility of a claim and availability of defense.

Educational Management
4
References
Andruski v. Coquitlam School District and another, 2015 BCHRT 74
Moore v. British Columbia 2012 SCC 61
Queensu.ca. (2019). Andruski v. Coquitlam School District and another, 2015 BCHRT 74.
Retrieved From: http://www.queensu.ca/humanrights/hrlg/meeting-headlines/meeting-24/
andruski-v-coquitlam-school-district