Skip to content

“Won’t somebody please think of the children?”: Family status accommodation for employers during COVID-19

Ruth Trask

On a typical, “normal” day in many Canadian households, adults leave home to go to work, and kids attend school or perhaps daycare. As we keep hearing, though, these are far from “normal” times.

StatsCan reports that some five million Canadians worked from home during April, including 3.3 million who did not work from home pre-pandemic.1 In the meantime, schools and daycares have been closed this spring across the country and around the world. Many parents are therefore now working from home in the absence of child care, and must juggle the competing obligations of childcare and work. Families are being asked to limit their contacts with others – in several provinces the concept of a family “bubble” or “double bubble” is frequently referenced – which reduces the availability of non-family caregivers.

With just six weeks left in the school year, it appears increasingly likely that most Canadian schools will not reopen before the regular June end date. This week, we have seen indications from Manitoba2 and in Newfoundland and Labrador3 that grades kindergarten through 12 may not re-open for in-person classes even in September 2020. Other provinces may follow suit. There is also a reasonable possibility that even in jurisdictions where schools are open, not all families will send their children to school. In Quebec, schools have already begun to re-open, but students’ attendance is not mandatory.4

It appears that some children may remain at home, in the company of their telecommuting parents, for the foreseeable future.

In the meantime, businesses and workplaces are beginning to re-open or expand operations in Atlantic Canada. Employers might be ready for a physical return to the workplace, but parents may continue to be stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to child care. Your employees may request to continue their work from home even after workplaces re-open, particularly in jurisdictions where school openings occur later.

Employers should keep an eye to their obligations of non-discrimination and accommodation on the basis of an individual’s family status. The human rights legislation in all Canadian jurisdictions, including for federally regulated employers, includes protection against discrimination on the basis of family status. Human rights obligations relating to family status are interpreted somewhat differently across the country, but there is agreement that the requirement to provide care to one’s children5 falls under the category of a protected family status activity.

The pandemic has significantly reduced or eliminated the availability of non-family child care for all parents. In the current environment, reasonable efforts to secure childcare might come up empty-handed.

Employees whose participation in the workplace is impacted as a result of their family status are entitled to accommodation up to the level of undue hardship. The specific facts that constitute undue hardship will differ in each individual circumstance, but we suspect that during these extraordinary times, human rights adjudicators may hold employers to a somewhat higher standard in terms of what accommodations are reasonably required of employers.

Accommodation is a two-way street. To trigger the duty to accommodate, employees have to be reasonably forthcoming about their family status and be open about their needs. Employees have a right to reasonable (not perfect) accommodation. On the other hand, the goal of an accommodation is to allow the employee to be productive and to contribute meaningfully at work.

What should employers consider in addressing family status accommodation requests?

  • Be flexible. Could an employee start work early, stay late, or work a split shift? Though it may not work for every business type, could you allow employees to determine their own hours? Can you measure productivity through metrics that are not based on time spent at one’s desk?
  • Communication is key. Initiate conversations with all your employees, but especially those who have child care obligations, to encourage transparency about their abilities and challenges. Check in occasionally to monitor how things are working and whether circumstances have changed.
  • It’s a marathon, not a sprint. How sustainable is the requested accommodation in the longer term for both parties? Ask employees what factors impact their need to continue to work from home. The need for accommodation might be short-term, for example where a 14-day self-isolation is implicated; or it might be longer-term, where no school is available, or the family is making efforts to protect an immunocompromised individual.
  • Establish a forgiving workplace culture for these strange times. Many of the employees who are working from home are not doing so by choice, but out of necessity. There may be some level of “real life” faced by your employees in the form of a child’s brief interruption during a telephone call or video chat.
  • Evaluate your work needs creatively and with an open mind. Can employees attend the office part-time and work from home the remainder of the time? Could you operate with only a portion of your workforce on-site? Having a reduced workforce on-site might dovetail effectively with maintaining physical distancing requirements in your workplace.
  • Consider stress and mental health impacts. The CMHA reports that significant numbers of Canadians are feeling isolated and anxious during the pandemic, with very few reporting general happiness.6 Parents are not immune. Educate your workforce about the signs of stress and burnout, encourage mental health self-care, and offer access to mental health supports to those who need them, including through your EAP.

1 Statistics Canada, 8 May 2020 Labour Force Survey, April 2020: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/200508/dq200508a-eng.htm
2 Global News, 15 May 2020 “Manitoba schools may not reopen by September, says school boards association president”: https://globalnews.ca/news/6942791/manitoba-schools-reopening-plans-coronavirus-school-boards-association/)
3 CBC News, 14 May 2020 “NL students staying home this September, as CNA, MUN online – and K-12 may follow suit”: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/fall-education-online-1.5568199
4 Montreal Gazette, 12 May 2020 “Rest of Canada is watching as Quebec sends its children back to school”: https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/rest-of-canada-is-watching-as-quebec-sends-its-children-back-to-school/
5 Providing care to other family members, including an elderly parent, can also have implications for family status accommodation.
6 Canadian Mental Health Association, 4 May 2020, “Canadians are anxious and crave real connection, but say they’re doing ‘fine’”: https://cmha.ca/news/canadians-are-anxious-and-crave-real-connection-but-say-theyre-doing-fine


This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership articles and updates.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top