Posts tagged: Sexual Assault

Increasing Damages for Sexual Assault in the Workplace

By , June 23, 2018 10:32 am

On average, damages awarded to an employee for a breach of the Human Rights Code, remain relatively low, typically $10,000 to $15,000. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario recognizes that low-value awards for discrimination and harassment create a license to discriminate. Following that message, it recently released two significant decisions that reflect a willingness to award higher amounts. Both decisions involve sexual assault and sexual harassment against women in vulnerable circumstances.

In both cases, the owners of the companies were found to be personally liable along with the corporations.

The Cases

In A.B. v. Joe Singer Shoes Limited et al, 2018 HRTO 107, the employee worked for Joe Singer for 28 years.  In a unique situation, the employer was also her landlord. The allegations made by A.B. were of atrocious conduct. She testified that she was forced to perform oral sex, intercourse, and degrading sexual conduct. Her employer watched pornography in his office and also criticized her skin colour, accent, and body. When she eventually reported the assaults to the police, as her landlord the company applied to the Landlord and Tenant Board to evict her and issued parking tickets to her for parking on private property.  Although she had issues with her memory during her testimony, the HRTO still preferred her evidence, and found company and the owner both responsible for the sexual assault and sexual harassment. The HRTO ordered the respondents to pay $200,000 as compensation for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.

Following Joe Singer, the HRTO released G.M. v. X Tattoo Parlour, 2018 HRTO 201. In X Tattoo, the applicant was a 15-year-old woman whose employer engaged in unwanted sexual discussion and forced the applicant to engage in sex acts. The sexual assault, harassment, and gendered discrimination had severely affected this applicant.  It increased her anxiety, caused her to engage in self-harm, sent her off track in school and caused her to give up activities that she previously loved. Looking to the Joe Singer decision, the HRTO awarded $75,000 in general damages (the maximum that the applicant had requested).

Lessons for Employees

We all hope that the conduct seen in Joe Singer and X Tattoo would never occur, at work or elsewhere. However, we know that sexual harassment remains commonplace in Ontario. As the bar for the maximum damage awards has increased, we can expect that the average award level will also increase.

These decisions give employees more confidence that the sometimes long, difficult, and emotionally trying legal process to complain about sexual assault and harassment is worthwhile. These decisions, and higher general damage awards in the future, increase the likelihood that employees report incidents and pursue their legal rights.

If you have experienced sexual assault or sexual harassment at work, and would like to speak with a lawyer about your rights, please contact us at [email protected] or 1-888-640-1728 (toll-free) or 647-204-8107 (within the GTA).

The material and information in this blog and this website are for general information only. They should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information referred to in this blog or its links. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog. Readers should obtain appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or the MacLeod Law Firm.

A “virtual slave” through sexual harassment and violence only awarded $50,000 as general damages

By , April 21, 2015 3:04 pm

A “virtual slave” through sexual harassment and violence only awarded $50,000 as general damages

In a recent decision, PN v. MR and FR the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), heard an appalling description of sexual harassment and physical violence and other humiliating and degrading treatment of a domestic care worker by her employers.

The employee, PN, a young Filipino woman, began her employment as a housekeeper and caregiver for her employers in Hong Kong.  Her abhorrent treatment began in Hong Kong. Upon moving to Canada with her employers, the behaviour continued.  Her employers limited the amount of food PN ate, they belittled her, controlled her movements inside and outside of the accommodation, refused to let her contact her family, failed to pay her wages and paid her significantly less than minimum wage, confiscated her passport, threatened her, physically assaulted her, and forced her to perform sexual acts. Eventually, PN was able to flee and found legal and psychological support. It is unclear from the decision if the Respondents were charged criminally.

After hearing the evidence, the Tribunal concluded that “there was significant physical harassment” which occurred while PN was “isolated and intimidated.” She “suffered symptoms consistent with posttraumatic stress disorder… She had to flee with nothing; not clothes, not money, not friends.”

The Tribunal noted that its highest award of damages to compensate for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect, also called ‘general damages’, was $75,000.  Despite this, the Tribunal found the appropriate award in the PN case to be $50,000.

In the Tribunal’s Kelly decision, Dr. Kelly had been diagnosed with ADHD. As a result of discrimination by the University of British Columbia, Dr. Kelly lost the opportunity to complete his medical residency program, and to become licensed and practice medicine. He suffered humiliation and embarrassment as a result of the discrimination he faced. The Tribunal awarded him $75,000 as damages for injury to for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect and $385,194.70 as damages for lost wages.

It is hard to imagine how a case involving exploitation, sexual harassment, sexual violence and physical violence along with other degrading treatment and forced social isolation would not garner a similar award of general damages to that of the Kelly decision. It is also not clear from the PN decision, why the adjudicator awarded $25,000 less than in the Kelly decision.

I have often called for an increase in the value of awards at human rights tribunals across the country. In Ontario, the Human Rights Tribunal has never awarded general damages as high as $75,000 and on average these awards range between $10,000 and $15,000. With the recent increased attention on precarious employment, vulnerable workers, and the continuation of sexual harassment and violence in the workplace, the PN hearing provided an opportunity for the BC Tribunal to convey to employers that degrading and exploiting vulnerable workers will not be tolerated and will be punished severely.  Unfortunately, the Tribunal did not seize this opportunity. This decision begs the question what must happen to an employee before a significant amount of damages will be awarded.

If you have experienced discrimination or harassment at work, and you want to speak with an employment and human rights lawyer, contact us at [email protected] or 1-888-640-1728 (toll free) or 647-633-9894 (within the GTA).



Panorama Theme by Themocracy