Skip Navigation LinksHome About UsOur Work and Statistics
Skip Navigation Links

Our Work & Statistics

Number of inquiries

In the period covered by our last Annual Report (April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2011), the Centre responded to 25,793 inquiries, up from 24,905 inquiries the previous year.

The Centre provided assistance, including legal advice, in response to:

  • 16,378 inquiries seeking legal assistance with respect to an experience of discrimination, including inquiries about a human rights application or proceeding before the Tribunal
  • Approximately 7,000 inquiries about legal disputes that fall outside the Code
  • Approximately 2,000 inquiries seeking general information about the human rights system or about discrimination
  • Approximately 400 inquiries were unrelated to human rights

In 2010/11, our lawyers provided legal services to 1,830 individuals at one or more stages of the Tribunal’s process.

What are inquiries about?

Area of discrimination

  • 75% of inquiries are about employment situations
  • 11% of inquiries are about accessing services or facilities
  • 5% of inquiries are about housing situations
  • 9% of inquiries were not related to an area of discrimination under the Code

What grounds of discrimination are at issue in inquiries?

  • Sexual Solicitation, Sexual Advances or Reprisals: less than 1%
  • Sexual Orientation: 2%
  • Sexual Harassment/Pregnancy/Gender Identity: 14%
  • Reprisal or threat of reprisal: 1%
  • Record of offences: less than 1%
  • Receipt of public assistance: less than 1%
  • Race: 4%
  • Place of origin: 3%
  • No ground identified: 10%
  • Marital status: 1%
  • Family status: 4%
  • Ethnic origin: 3%
  • Disability or perceived disability: 44%
  • Creed (e.g. religion): 3%
  • Colour: 3%
  • Citizenship: less than 1%
  • Association: less than 1%
  • Ancestry: 2%
  • Age: 5%

Working across Ontario

In 2010-11, the Centre responded to inquiries from all areas of the province. Each year, more than 60% of inquiries have come from outside the Greater Toronto Area.

  • North region: 6%
  • Central region: 24%
  • East region: 11%
  • Greater Toronto area: 33%
  • West region: 25%

The Centre is headquartered in Toronto, and has legal staff in Guelph, Toronto, Sault Ste. Marie, Ottawa, and Thunder Bay.

Public Interest Remedies

Public interest remedies at hearings

In litigating applications before the Tribunal in 2010/11, the Centre achieved a public interest remedy in 70% of its successful decisions, including orders:

  • requiring an employer to take human rights training provided by the Commission
  • requiring a service provider to retain at their own expense a qualified consultant to review practices and make recommendations concerning accommodation of children with disabilities in all the respondent’s programs
  • requiring a police service to develop training materials for the investigation of harassment, discrimination and reprisal complaints in consultation with a human rights expert
  • requiring an employer to retain an independent human rights expert to develop a human rights policy and a procedure for harassment complaints

In addition, the Centre has won, at hearings, financial compensation for applicants totalling in excess of $346,000.

Public interest remedies in settlements

Examples of public interest remedies negotiated by the Centre in settlement agreements over the past three years include:

  • In response to allegations of disability-based discrimination in employment, a national retailer agreed to develop a country-wide accommodation policy and to train its human resources and management staff in all Canadian locations
  • In response to allegations of discrimination in employment based on race and ethnic origin, a telemarketing company agreed to distribute a memo to all existing employees clarifying that discriminatory or harassing statements by customers on the basis of race, place of origin, ethnic origin or any other prohibited grounds of discrimination will not be tolerated by the company. Also agreed to conduct a training program and establish an internal process for employees to use when subjected to discriminatory or harassing conduct
  • In response to allegations of discrimination in housing on the basis of disability, a non-profit housing provider agreed to remove mobility barriers in common areas of a multi-unit building and to implement and train staff on a new accommodation policy (with complaint forms posted on its website and 30 day deadline for response) within 6 months
  • In response to allegations of sexual harassment in a workplace staffed by new immigrants, a company agreed to implement and train all staff on a human rights policy (including complaint mechanism). Also agreed to conduct information sessions for employees about the new policy in their own languages
  • In response to allegations of discrimination in services based on disability, a police service agreed to deliver regular staff training on meeting the needs of the deaf community, as well as a new monitoring system in which all occurrences involving deaf persons are reviewed
  • In response to allegations of discrimination in services based on place of origin and ethnic origin, a store agreed to develop a human rights policy to include issues specific to immigrants. Agreed to post notice of the policy and the complaints process in the store
  • In response to allegations of harassment based on sexual orientation, a call centre agreed to retain an external consultant to provide human rights training for supervisory employees relating to harassment in the workplace. Agreed to deliver training in-housing annually

In 2010/11, an estimated 75% of our settlements achieved a public interest remedy; negotiated financial compensation exceeded $300,000.

More systemic discrimination cases

The term “systemic discrimination” is used to describe a pattern of discriminatory behaviour, policies or practices that are part of the structure of an organization or system, and which create or perpetuate disadvantage for individuals.

The Centre has provided representation on many applications that raise issues of systemic discrimination. Examples include:

  • Applications to challenge the absence of accommodation measures in services for persons in the deaf community
  • Applications to challenge discriminatory zoning
  • Applications to challenge police practices and racial profiling by police
  • Applications to challenge structural bias, based on race, in promotion policies of large employers
  • Applications to challenge school board policies affecting transgendered students
  • Applications to challenge employment policies affecting the responsibilities of families with children
  • Applications to challenge employment policies affecting immigrant workers, migrant workers and older workers