Short Fact Pattern Analysis Revised-2

Short Fact Pattern Analysis
Student’s Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Professor:
Case Scenario
Jane began her employment with X Company as a quality supervisor in 2010. She is currently employed in the company as a safety supervisor, a position she assumed in 2014. She is a mother of triplets who were born on December 29, 2016, and another daughter who was born on August 6, 2007. In 2017, Jane applied for a promotion as a quality manager. Three other X Company employees, all of whom were females and one male applied for the safety manager position. The top two candidates for the position were Jane and George, the latter who is a father of two children of minor ages. Alice, who is the HR head is said to have made certain comments during the interview, which ultimately tipped the scale in his favour.
Moreover, George is alleged to have published certain defamatory information about Jane in a local daily. Specifically, Alice asked Jane whether she will be overwhelmed working as a mother of four children, given that the position she was being interviewed for, was highly demanding. Moreover, she remarked that she was seeing a prospect that Jane would require many maternity leaves on her general work schedule, which would be detrimental to the firm. The two candidates reported to Alice, the HR, and the two were interviewed by Alice, Diana, who was their former manager, Justin, a director in the company. George was selected for the promotion of Jane.
Analysis
Issues of justice can draw different perspectives from varying agencies and bodies.

Referring to the scenario above, the Equality and Human Rights Commission can see the case as an apparent case maternity paranoia at the workplace. Much like the comparison with the pop can scenario, certain legal minds might see the case from other perspectives. The provincial prosecution office and the local police department might be drawn to the possibility of a criminal libel offence. The National Women’s Liberal Commission might see a possibility for tort suit, based on civil libel on the part of the company, under the principle of vicarious liability
A perspective from the Crown prosecution office would entail preferring criminal charges against Alice for harassment and criminal libel for spreading false information about Jane. In Canada, libel is a criminal offence under the country’s Criminal Code. This offence is punishable by a prison sentence of a maximum of two years, or it might even be five years, when the court determines that the information being published was false, particularly, section 300 or section 301 of the code (Carter, 2004). The former carries a prison term of up to five years in prison identified as a known falsehood, while the former can carry a sentence of up to two years for defamatory libel. Under such a provision, one can be charged with libel when what is posted turns out to be true (Bilsky, 2011). Unlike in a civil case, where the truth can make the plaintiff lose a case, in a criminal case, the truth is not considered as a defense.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission might argue that Jane was unlawfully discriminated based on her gender and invoke the B.C Human Rights Code. Specifically, the commission might point put that Jane as passed on for the promotion because of status as a mother of triplets and another child. Jane’s denial of the position was reduced to one of discrimination based on parental obligations of caregiver state, which is actionable under the provincial laws. When the Company overlooked Jane for promotion because of her small children, the company violated British Columbia’s Employment Standards Act and Regulation and Canada Labour Code.
These laws proscribe discrimination in several aspects of an employment relationship (Player & Sperino, 2017). Even though being a mother of small children is not listed under the categories, the laws were still violated as the effect of overlooking her promotion produced a disparate impact. The laws prescribed employment practices that have a discriminatory impact unless such are linked to job performance. Employment Standards Act and Regulation demand the removal of artificial, cosmetic and superfluous barriers to employment and act covetously to discriminate against an individual on a certain basis. If an employment practice that operates to overlook mothers of small children cannot be linked to job performance is proscribed despite the employer’s alleged lack of discriminatory intent.
Being a mother of small children, occupying a position that involves recovery in three states surely falls under disparate impact (Williams & Cooper, 2004). However, a claim against disparate impact is solidified by the alleged circumstantial evidence provided by the plaintiff given the remarks by Alice inferring to her children being too much on her plate with the job. The forum for Canadian Ombudsman might prefer a civil case against the company. The Supreme Court of Canada has often invoked common law when interpreting unfair trade practices. Textualism, where the fundamental interpretation of the law is based on the literal meaning of the legal text, can be invoked as the proper methodology when interpreting the laws. The direct impact of such a trend involves tort and textualism to reduce unfair trade by relying on the tight causal benchmarks.
The Canadian Labour Congress can choose to arbitrate between the team representing Jane and the company to find an amicable solution to the impasse (Hunt & Eaton, 2007).The company obviously created a maternal wall bias when they decided to overlook Jane for the promotion: however, the decision might have been well intended for the general health of the organization. The maternal wall bias originates from the descriptive bias, which is pegged on the assumption of how an individual will act. Ordinarily, mothers must often put the interests of her small children above that of any other issue, which include that of her job. It is a reasonable assumption, which stems on maternal instincts, and she might be excused or given the benefit of doubt when projects under leadership fall behind, as the company might be forced to assume that she is working on them as fast as she can, given her current condition (Collins, 2003). It is possible that the company will attribute delays to the fact that she has a part-time commitment and schedules.
The National Women’s Liberal Commission might see a situation that might need their input. They might recognise that while the intentions of the selection panel were good for the business, it was the way they went about the business that was bad, making insinuations on her role as mother to be the stumbling block to her promotion, clearly gave her the platform to challenge their selection process. Alice, the decision maker in the case study, needs training and development to reduce risks in the selection process. Alice requires training and education in employment laws, and an acquaintance with non-discriminatory laws, and professionalism during the interview process and the entire selection process. Training should extend to the other two members of the selection panel for the promotion, and this is because they should have advised Alice against certain remarks that gave Jane a platform to challenge their decision.
The Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board might see the scenario as an opportunity to train the HR professionals at the firm to improve their legal responsibilities to their employees. However, it should be noted that because every province in the country similarly regulates labour issues, although not identical, the training should conform with the requirements of the region. A training and development program should be fitted with clear goals, and which involves the individual in determining the skills, knowledge and abilities to be learned (Fudge & Vosko, 2001). The individual participates in various activities during the learning process, and the work experiences and knowledge that the respective trainee should bring to learning situation can be applied as a resource.
A practical and proven problem-focused approach base on practical examples are used, besides new materials linked to the trainees’ past learning and work experience is relevant to the program. Also, the employees are provided with the opportunity to solidify what they do learn when applying in actual practice. However, the trainee should be trained in an environment that is non-condescending, supportive, informal or safe. The trainee shall benefit from the ultimate respect accorded, and should not be reminded of past mistakes committed in the past, such as the case study as a report in the case. Reminding people of their past mistakes is not always a good idea and could result into a negative altitude. In its entirety, the training program should be developed in a way that supports positive self-esteem. Management games can serve as a useful training method. Management games replicate real-life issues that people in different carders face at the workplace and attract different types of trainees.
References
Bilsky, L. (2011). The Habibi libel trial: Defamation and the hidden-community basis of criminal law. University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(4), 617-655.
Carter, E. L. (2004). Outlaw Speech on the Internet: Examining the Link between Unique Characteristics of Online Media and Criminal Libel Prosecutions. Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. LJ, 21, 289.
Collins, H. (2003). Discrimination, equality and social inclusion. The modern law review, 66(1), 16-43.
Fudge, J., & Vosko, L. F. (2001). Gender, segmentation and the standard employment relationship in Canadian labour law, legislation and policy. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 22(2), 271-310.
Hunt, G., & Eaton, J. (2007). We are family: labour responds to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender workers. Equity, Diversity, and Canadian Labour, 130-55.
Player, M., & Sperino, S. (2017). Federal law of employment discrimination in a nutshell. West Academic.
Williams, J. C., & Cooper, H. C. (2004). The public policy of motherhood. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4), 849-865.