ARCHIVED - Canadian Human Rights Commission

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

SECTION II – ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

Analysis by Program Activity

Strategic Outcome

Equality, respect for human rights and protection from discrimination by fostering understanding of, and compliance with, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) and the Employment Equity Act (EEA) by federally regulated employers and service providers, as well as the public whom they serve.

Program Activity

A. Human Rights Knowledge Development and Dissemination Program

Financial Resources ($ thousands)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
$4,026	$4,500	$4,246

Human Resources (FTE)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
29	33	34

Description

The Knowledge Centre contributes to increasing awareness and understanding of the CHRA and the EEA through the following activities:

• undertake research and developing policies on topical issues to assist stakeholders (including the Canadian public) in understanding their rights and obligations under the Acts and to increase awareness about how to improve respect for human rights in Canada;
• urge repeal of section 67 (the section that specifies that provisions made under the Indian Act are exempted from the CHRA) to support full access to human rights protection by First Nations people;
• work internationally to further human rights awareness abroad; and
• increase awareness of international human rights standards to strengthen the need for Canadian compliance.

Plans for 2008–09

Disability is the most frequently cited ground of discrimination in complaints accepted by the Commission. During 2008–09, the CHRC will work to increase knowledge and awareness of how to include people with disabilities into Canadian society by undertaking the following activities:

• complete an examination of 10 years of complaints submitted to the CHRC on the ground of disability, with an emphasis on identifying barriers that have been—and remain to be—addressed;
• develop an internal policy on mental health, which will guide the CHRC in accommodating mental illness within its workplace. The policy will also be made public and circulated externally to raise awareness of the impact of mental health issues in employment and to provide a template for an accommodation policy that other organizations may wish to adopt or adapt in their own workplace;
• release a policy on alcohol and drug testing in the workplace that reflects current case law on this subject;
• provide policy input regarding the enactment of federal legislation on accessibility; and
• provide policy support to encourage Canada’s ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was adopted by the United Nations in December 2006.

Canada is proud of being a diverse, multicultural society. During 2008–09, the CHRC will expand knowledge and awareness of how human rights can be reflected in various cultural contexts, both domestically and internationally, by undertaking a variety of activities:

• implement targeted outreach to support awareness and understanding of human rights principles in a First Nations context, in light of Parliament’s anticipated repeal of section 67 of the CHRA;
• develop stronger relations with other human rights institutions through the Canadian Association of Statutory Human Rights Agencies (CASHRA); the Network of National Human Rights Institutions of the Americas; and the Commonwealth Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (including steering committee meetings); and
• chair the International Coordinating Committee (ICC) of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, which includes chairing three or more ICC meetings during the year and leading efforts to develop its governance structure and legal status.

The CHRC will also increase knowledge and awareness of human rights in 2008–09 through the following activities:

• release a background paper regarding the creation of a Report Card, which would measure and monitor respect for Human Rights in Canada;
• release papers relating to national security issues; and
• further develop a policy document on Internet hate messaging.

Risks, Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

It is possible to identify a number of factors that may impede the Commission’s ability to increase awareness and understanding of human rights through the activities listed above. The primary risks, and our efforts to mitigate them, include the following:

• that research and policies will not be accessed—and/or used—by targeted groups. This can be mitigated by involving key government and civil society (i.e., non-governmental organizations, unions, industry associations) and stakeholders early in the process, and developing a communication strategy to reach out to the intended audiences after the release of products;
• that unforeseen societal issues may emerge that will require the CHRC to change the focus areas of its policy development and research agenda. This can be mitigated by prioritizing areas for development, remaining flexible to adapt to changing priorities, and consulting with stakeholder groups;
• that no one knows when (or whether) section 67 of the CHRA will be repealed. If repealed, it is likely that there will be only a limited period in which to undertake dialogue with First Nations communities and develop interpretive principles. Little advance work can be done, as additional resources will not become available until after section 67 is repealed. However, the outreach activities being undertaken should raise awareness about human rights protection and increase discussion about the impacts of the potential repeal;
• that there is uncertainty around resources available to First Nations to deal with the repeal of section 67. This can be mitigated by engaging other government departments and agencies in planning sessions prior to the repeal regarding joint needs and potential resources;
• that if the ICC does not incorporate, there is a significant risk that national institutions will not be able to formally assign contributions (financial and in-kind), and that the ICC will not therefore obtain sufficient resources to undertake its work or be a significant actor in the newly established Human Rights Council; and
• that there is the risk that conflicting priorities may prevent the CHRC from undertaking all of these proposed activities.

 

Expected Results	Performance Indicators
Awareness and understanding of the Acts are increased among federally regulated employers and service providers, as well as the public whom they serve.	Short term: The research and policy products must be accessed in order to increase awareness and understanding. The number of annual visits to CHRC’s website and number of subscribers for information updates. Medium term: The percentage of human resource managers in federal government departments who are aware of the employer requirements under the Acts.

 

Program Activity

B. Discrimination Prevention Program

Financial Resources ($ thousands)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
$6,424	$6,629	$6,608

Human Resources (FTE)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
72	74	75

Description

The Discrimination Prevention Program engages key stakeholders with the goal of preventing discrimination in federally regulated workplaces and service centres, and in raising awareness, understanding and acceptance of human rights.

The Commission works with federally regulated organizations to identify areas where improvements are required to create workplaces and service delivery centres that embrace a human rights culture. The Commission works closely and collaboratively with employers and service providers so they can better understand their obligations under the Canadian Human Rights Act and Employment Equity Act and their responsibilities for the application of human rights principles. The Commission also works collaboratively with central agencies in furthering human rights across the federal system.

Plans for 2008–09

During 2008–09, the Commission will focus on developing partnerships as follows:

• engage key federal stakeholders and various members of civil society to collaborate with the CHRC and federally regulated organizations to foster a culture of human rights in the workplace; and
• establish a discrimination prevention engagement strategy related to various functional communities and networks (i.e., managers' networks, human resources committees, labour relations communities).

The Commission is also mandated to conduct audits of workplaces to ensure compliance with employment equity obligations under the EEA. These audits afford an opportunity for the Commission to share knowledge with employers regarding hiring and promotion practices that best help to ensure equality in the workplace for designated groups. During 2008–09, the Commission will focus on an employment equity model to ensure that it becomes fully operational and contributes to increased representation of the four targeted groups and assists audited organizations in meeting their employment equity plan goals. During 2008–09, the Commission will continue to enforce the EEA as follows:

• audit federally regulated employers in the private sector and the public sector;
• conduct an evaluation (including a client satisfaction survey) of the employment equity audit process to identify standards and best/proven practices;
• complete an average of 40 audits per year for the next three years;
• build upon the partnerships developed with Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC), Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) and Canada Public Service Agency (CPSA) to leverage support for the implementation of the EEA; and
• promote the benefits and advantages of employment equity to stakeholders as part of the Commission’s outreach initiatives.

Risks, Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

The Commission has identified factors that may impede its ability to complete its planned activities related to preventing discrimination. The primary risks and efforts to mitigate them include the following:

• demand for prevention services exceeds internal resource supply. This can be mitigated by leveraging external resources and aligning commitments with resources available (e.g. for training);
• negative reaction of stakeholders not "aligned" with new CHRC vision. This can be mitigated by increasing communication of CHRC’s vision and examples of tangible results to a broad range of stakeholders and enhancing the quality of existing product offerings while limiting the development of new ones;
• lack of resources to conduct the planned number of audits due to challenges in recruiting and retaining employees stemming from a competitive external environment. This can be mitigated by possible use of contractors;
• potential lack of cooperation from stakeholders might lead to delays and potential non-attainment of increased partnership development. This can be mitigated by signing of Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and increased frequency of contacts; and
• challenges with employers meeting audit timelines might reduce the number of audits completed in a year. This can be mitigated through adherence to the audit timelines.

 

Expected Results	Performance Indicators
Federally regulated employers and service providers are committed to preventing discrimination and to resolving disputes internally. The employment equity audit model has contributed to audited organizations having met their employment equity plan goals.	Medium-term: Degree of commitment by MOU signatory organizations to preventing discrimination and to resolving disputes internally.   Medium-term: Degree of commitment by MOU signatory organizations to preventing discrimination and to resolving disputes internally.

 

Program Activity

C. Human Rights Dispute Resolution Program

Financial Resources ($ thousands)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
$10,743	$11,204	$11,454

Human Resources (FTE)

2008-09	2009-10	2010-11
89	91	93

Description

The Canadian Human Rights Commission provides dispute resolution services in cases of alleged discrimination by federally regulated organizations, including employers, unions and service providers. Allegations of discrimination are screened to ensure they fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction, and inquirers may be referred to other redress mechanisms, such as a grievance process. If the dispute falls within the Commission’s jurisdiction, the parties are offered services to assist them in resolving the matter without filing a complaint. If the matter cannot be resolved and the inquirer wishes to file a complaint, the case may be assigned to a mediator or an investigator. Ultimately, the Commission may ask that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hear the case. Throughout the process, the parties are encouraged to look for solutions by participating in dialogue and dispute resolution activities.

The Commission’s dispute resolution process is designed to provide timely remedies to the victims of discrimination, advance human rights law and make the most efficient use of resources. Cases are screened to determine which strategy is most appropriate: referral to another redress mechanism, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), investigation or litigation. ADR is the preferred approach in most cases, particularly in those that do not raise allegations of systemic discrimination. Litigation focuses on cases that are precedent-setting. Investigation supports both ADR and litigation by clarifying issues and facts. The Commission offers the following four ADR services:

• early resolution (before a complaint is filed);
• preventive mediation (before a complaint is filed);
• mediation (immediately after a complaint is filed); and
• conciliation (at the discretion of the Commission, after an investigation has been carried out).

Plans for 2008–09

• The Commission will ensure that, when reasonably available, cases are referred to other redress processes in a timely and efficient manner. New procedures, to be implemented in 2008–09, will make it easier for parties to understand the decision-making process and to make their positions known to the Commission.
• The Commission will maximize the use of ADR, especially prior to the filing of a complaint. Two new ADR processes were introduced in 2007–08: early resolution and preventive mediation. Both processes take place before a complaint has been filed.
• The Commission will measure client satisfaction with ADR processes through the use of a client survey questionnaire to be distributed to the parties at all preventive mediation, mediation and conciliation sessions.
• The Commission will increase the efficiency of investigations. Greater use will be made of the process of preliminary assessment, which emphasizes the early clarification and narrowing of issues with the parties.

Risks, Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

• Impact on the Commission’s resources if section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is repealed. This can be mitigated through building internal capacity and consulting with First Nations and ADR experts to prepare dispute resolution models, which could be used by communities to resolve human rights complaints internally.
• Delays in obtaining responses and submissions from complainants and respondents. This can be mitigated through developing a more proactive investigation model, which makes greater use of the process of preliminary assessment and development of rules of procedure that establish timelines for submissions by the parties to a complaint.
• Impact on resources of delays in scheduling and duration of Tribunal hearings. This can be mitigated through continued participation with the Tribunal in case conferences and mediation prior to the commencement of hearings.

 

Expected Results

Performance Indicators

Commission involvement in human rights disputes has facilitated the resolution of disputes in a non-adversarial manner at the earliest stage possible, ensured that public interest is addressed, and increased understanding of the CHRA.     Parties to disputes are satisfied with the dispute resolution process.

The percentage of disputes settled at the Commission out of the total of those dealt with. (Historically, settlement rates have been calculated for accepted complaints only; we will now include early resolution settlements, even though these occur before a dispute becomes an officially accepted complaint.)   The percentage of satisfaction rates, for example, regarding the extent to which service was fair, user-friendly, and/or flexible.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page