HRM 16127 Assignment 1: Case Studies on Human Rights Violations

This document presents an analysis of three case studies related to Human Resource Management and legal requirements. The first case involves Neha, who experiences sexual harassment and a violation of her human rights in a nursery setting, leading to her termination. The second case study focuses on Simon, a black Canadian facing racial discrimination in a car wash company, including unfair treatment and wrongful termination. The final case study discusses Rebecca, who encounters gender and disability discrimination during a job interview at a hospital. The analysis covers legal obligations, discriminatory practices, and potential actions to prevent such violations, referencing relevant legislation and the Canadian Human Rights Act. The assignment explores the jurisdiction, prohibited grounds, and the responsibilities of employers and employees regarding workplace conduct and equal opportunities.

Running head: HRM
HRM
Name of Student
Name of University
Author’s Note

1HRM
Case study 1: Neha
Answer 1
The jurisdiction under which the nursery falls is TCRA jurisdiction. The nursery owner
did violate the Human Rights Act in numerous ways. Firstly he started behaving in an awkward
manner, he used to put his hands on her shoulder, hips and places which made Neha very
uncomfortable, this way he violated the Human Rights Act because behaving with an employee
which makes him uncomfortable. Secondly he started sharing his personal problems with Neha,
in which she was not at all interested. Here he violated the law because sharing personal
problems with an employee at workplace is illegal or ethically wrong (Howard-Hassmann,
2018). After that he once tried to create physical intimacy with her, here Neha backed out and
clearly stated that she had a partner already and she was not interested in any other relationship
other that professional with Mr. Carmelo. Even after she backed out and made things clear to
him, Carmelo invited her at his apartment for making physical intimacy with her, when she
refused to go to his apartment, he fired her. This was completely against the Human Rights Act
because according to the law it is illegal to fore physical contact on an employee and if the
employee refuses to it, under no grounds he can be terminated.
Answer 2
When Neha had first become uncomfortable with the nursery owner’s behavior but she
could not tell it to him because he was the owner of the nursery and her boss as well, hence she
did not have the courage to tell him because she might have got fired or a mess might have been
created by the owner saying that she had approached to him first. Secondly when she first backed
out she expected him to understand and stop continuing with his deeds, but he continued with
that.

2HRM
Answer 3
Under various circumstances as outlined in the provided case study, she is under few
legal obligations with the support of which she can complain against the nursery owner and his
deeds. As an employee she has a right to have a workplace that is free from any kind of
discrimination and sexual harassment (Banks, 2016). The employer is usually responsible and
has a duty of care for ensuring her wellbeing a work and health. Implementation and
enforcement of various policies on harassment would help in employees to know what must be
done when they face such issues. In case of sexual harassment, the nursery owner can be found
vicariously liable, he might be found accountable for his actions.
Answer 4
Termination of Neha was a factor when determining because her rights were completely
violated, she was not provided with a free and comfortable environment in her workplace, she
was also harassed and he tried to make physical contact with her. She was not provided with
good behavior at her workplace and the owner took advantage of his post for harassing Neha.
Answer 5
Yes, if this case study was involved with a male employee it would still be a violation of
Human Rights Code because according to that code, no employee must be harassed on any
ground in a workplace. If the case study involved a male employee and a female boss, it would
be violation as well because the case would have been same until the male employee would have
agreed for creating a physical intimacy with the boss. If the case involved a female employee and
a female boss it would be violation as well, just because the gender is equal does not mean that it
changes the level of harassment. Harassment is treated equally irrespective of the gender of a
person.

3HRM
Case study 2: Simon
Answer 6
Their jurisdiction under which the business of car wash fall is Vehicle Wash Operations.
Discrimination can be defined as a specific action or a particular decision which results in
negative or an unfair treatment towards an individual or a specific group (Canadian Human
Rights Commission, 2019). Discrimination can be done on several grounds like race, age, sex,
religion and many more. Some sorts of discrimination are considered as illegal under the
provincial and federal human rights law. In the case study of Simon, he had been discriminated
on the ground of race. Simon is a black Canadian; belonging to this race he had faced numerous
problems in looking for a weekend job. At last when he got a chance to appear for a job at a car
washing company, he was discriminated on regular basis.
The shift manager who was responsible for providing Simon with training did not pay
proper attention. The co-workers who work with Simon do not consider him as an employee and
does not even communicate with him. When Simon asked questions to they did not help him out
on how to do the work or use the equipments. There had been an incident when specific
equipment was heated to excess amount and it broke down. This was caused due to some issues
in the system or due to an employee’s negligence but the owner of the company blamed the
incident completely on Simon and he was fired. These incidents provide valid evidence on the
fact that Simon was discriminated on the basis of his race.
Answer 7

4HRM
The shift manager of Simon did not have any justifiable reason to terminate Simon from
his job. It is very common that law does not support the termination of an employee on the basis
of his color, cast, or creed. The protection is not just limited to the time of termination, it also
includes the refusal to hire various potential employees on the basis of their race, which had
occurred in the case study of Simon (Adams, 2016). Canada follows a strict set of rules and
regulations on human rights law and systems that addresses various types of discrimination in
workplace (Hick, Halpin & Hoskins, 2016). This discrimination can take place on an institutional
or a systematic level from daily rules.
Answer 8
The main purpose of Canadian Human Rights Commission is to ensure that the Canadian
Human Rights Act works for the benefit of all Canadians. The Canadian Human Rights Act is to
provide effect to a principle, the principle is “all individuals should have an equal opportunity to
make for themselves the lives that they wanted to have their needs accommodated consistent
with their duties and obligations as members of society” (Roth, 2018). This act protects
countrymen under discriminatory practices that tend to hinder the principle. This commission
consists of three main aspects. The aspects are as follows
 To provide timely and effective means for resolving individual complaints: Simon can
complain against the organization and he must be provided with proper importance
during solving the issues.
 To promote knowledge on human rights in Canada along with encouraging people in
following various principles of equality: The organization must be provided the
knowledge regarding the principles of Canadian Human Rights Act and the penalties

5HRM
provided to organizations on the grounds of racial discrimination. Educating people on
the principles would prevent people to judge people based on their race (Lehrer, 2015).
 To help in reducing barriers to equality in employment and access to services: This factor
would help the organization in preventing these types of practices. The barrier that has
been created in the case study of Simon includes communication barrier. This barrier has
been produced due to the discrimination based on which Simon was judged. He was not
allowed to learn the job properly and communicate with others.
Answer 9
Discrimination of employees on any grounds is considered illegal. Various federal
contractors as well as subcontractors should undertake some affirmative actions in order to
guarantee equal employment opportunity irrespective of these factors. Discrimination prevents a
workplace to provide an employee with equal benefits and facilities (Selby, Barras & Beaman,
2018). According to the case study of Simon, the way he was treated by the shift manager and
his co-workers had made him very uncomfortable in the workplace. The environment created
was very uncomfortable and ugly. The way his co-workers bullied him had a sense of ignorance
and injustice. This proves that they could never accept Simon as an employee and they have
never wanted him to work with them. According to various researches, an employment policy or
a specific practice which applies to everyone, irrespective of color or race can be considered as
illegal in case it creates a negative impact on the employees or the employment of people of a
specific color or race (Failler, 2018). In the provided case study Simon, being black in race was
discriminated and judged in workplace, similarly if an organization does not hire employees who
are dark would be unlawful and would have a negative impact on the employment of Canadian
countrymen.

6HRM
The environment created due to the behavior of shift manager, owner and co- workers in
the organization had made it uncomfortable for everyone especially Simon, it must have been
clear to all that the employees must not be discriminated on the basis of their race, color and
creed (Donnelly & Whelan, 2017). Had Simo been judged on the basis of his urge to work or his
ability to work and his talent to learn, he would have performed very well.
Case study 3: Rebecca
Answer 10
The types of discrimination that was faced by Rebecca in this case was the discrimination
on the grounds of gender and disability. Firstly they agreed to hire her but when they noticed that
few of her fingers were shorter than the normal length, she was judges on the basis of her
disability, and they did not think it was a good idea to hire her (Kröller, 2017). She was also
judged on the basis of her gender because they felt being a girl, with this sort of disability she
would not be able to lift patients and that she was not suitable for this job.
Answer 11
The director and interviewer must not have judged her on the basis of her disability, they
must have been provided her with a chance to prove if she was capable of doing the job and then
decide either to hire her or terminate her. Besides this, she had also provided her experience
certificate where she had been a part of kindergarten school and she claimed to have lifted
children with disabilities without any difficulty, they must have trusted her experience certificate
and hired her, and if not that they must have provided her a chance to prove herself (Clément,
2016). To some extent, they had reasons to judge her on the basis of her disability because she
had few fingers shorter than others so she might face problems in holding someone with proper
grip. One more factor was considered that previously she had lifted children with disabilities but

7HRM
at a nursing home she might have to lift a grown up person and there is a huge difference in both
the cases.
Answer 12
Five steps that the hospital could have taken in order to prevent such cases in future are
as follows
 The candidates must be requested to undergo a complete physical checkup
 The employees with experience must be provided with a chance to prove
themselves
 Initially the candidates with experience must be provided with small and simple
tasks for testing their ability
 Candidates who are hired for lifting and helping patients must be undergone
through a special test where their physical abilities would be tested.
 Employees or candidates must not be judged on the grounds of their gender.

8HRM
References
Adams, E. M. (2016). Human rights at work: Physical standards for employment and human
rights law. Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism, 41(6), S63-S73.
Banks, K. (2016). Reasonable accommodation as equal opportunity in Canadian employment
law.
Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne.
(2019). Retrieved from https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/index.html
Clément, D. (2016). Human Rights in Canada: A History. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press.
Donnelly, J., & Whelan, D. J. (2017). International human rights. Hachette UK.
Failler, A. (2018). Canada 150: exhibiting national memory at the Canadian Museum for Human
Rights. Citizenship Studies, 22(4), 358-380.
Hick, S., Halpin, E., & Hoskins, E. (Eds.). (2016). Human rights and the Internet. Springer.
Howard-Hassmann, R. E. (2018). Human rights and the search for community. Routledge.
Kröller, E. M. (Ed.). (2017). The Cambridge companion to Canadian literature. Cambridge
University Press.
Lehrer, E. (2015). Thinking through the Canadian museum for human rights. American
Quarterly, 67(4), 1195-1216.
Roth, T. (2018). Human Rights and the Canadian Extractive Sector in Latin America: Can
Canada do more to prevent abuses and improve access to justice?.
Selby, J. A., Barras, A., & Beaman, L. G. (2018). Rethinking Canadian discourses of" reasonable
accommodation". Social Inclusion, 6(2), 162-172.