Employers must accommodate family responsibilities, up to a certain point

What happens when an employee’s family responsibilities conflict with his or her responsibilities at work?

The answer is more involved than you might think.

The Employment Standards Act of B.C. provides employees with the ability to take “family responsibility leave.”

Employers must provide employees with up to five days’ unpaid leave per year to meet family responsibilities related to the care, health or education of a child in the employee’s care or the health of a family member of the employee’s immediate family.

“Immediate family” means the spouse, child, parent, guardian, sibling, grandchild or grandparent of the employee and any person who lives with the employee as a member of the employee’s family.

It is a good idea for both the employee and employer to document family responsibility leave taken, in case a dispute arises later.

What if five days per year is not sufficient?

The B.C. Human Rights Code prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of a number of factors often referred to as “protected grounds.” The protected grounds include race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, political belief, religion, marital status, “family status,” physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression or age of that person or certain types of offences.

There are many more nuances, but basically once an employee is within a protected ground, the employer is not permitted to treat that person adversely because of a protected factor, such as family status. There is an exception for bona fide occupational requirements, which is a topic unto itself.

In recent years, “family status” has been getting some attention. What exactly is family status?

It is not defined in the Human Rights Code. It, like other protected grounds, is interpreted broadly.

In B v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), the Supreme Court of Canada said family status includes both the absolute status of being a family member (a father, mother, sister, etc.) and the relative status of being in a particular family relationship.

Generally, it includes childcare responsibilities. Although there are fewer cases, it might also include caring for aging parents or other adult family members.

To avoid discriminating against the employee, the employer must accommodate the employee’s requests, up to the “point of undue hardship.”

“Undue hardship” is not defined in the Human Rights Code. Employers are expected to absorb some hardship in an effort to accommodate. It’s when the hardship becomes “undue” that the duty to accommodate ends.

For example, an employee may request a change in work shifts because of family responsibilities. The employer should accommodate this, if at all possible.

However, if there is insufficient staff to meet the extra demand, thus placing added stress on other employees and hiring more staff is not financially feasible, the employer might have reached the point of undue hardship. At this point, the employee will have to make other family arrangements to continue working in that job.

If an employee is unable to perform his or her duties at work because of family status, and either the job requirements to be performed are bona fide occupational requirements or accommodation would cause the employer undue hardship, the employer may refuse to accommodate the employee’s needs. If all else fails, it is possible that an employer in this situation might consider disciplining the employee.

Though an employer considering this ought to tread carefully.

Susan Kootnekoff is a lawyer with Inspire Law. Phone: 250-764-7710. Email info @ inspirelaw.ca On the web: inspirelaw.ca. This article is intended to provide general thoughts and information, not to provide legal advice.