Saturday, April 26, 2008
My position on the accomodations - January 31, 2007
During the last week, Quebec's population has witnessed some different measures to minimize the discrimination victim could be a minority within the Canadian society, which is simply called reasonable accommodation.
During a recent email from the local media, I was asked, I Francis Chartrand, the last NDP candidate in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, it was my position to make this very controversial subject. Considering that the position of the NDP, like other federal parties, is flexible in this area, therefore I speak as a Deux-Montagnes citizen concerned and not a politician.
In terms of employment relationship, the Supreme Court of Canada defines, in 1985, the scope of this standard: "The obligation in the case of discrimination because of an adverse impact based on religion or belief, is to take reasonable steps to reach agreement with the complainant, unless it causes overstress: in other words, it is to take such measures as may be reasonable to agree without this n ' unduly hindering the business of the employer and does not impose excessive charges. "
Although the term "reasonable accommodation" date of 1980 years in Canadian law, the concept has gained prominence in 2002 after a case involving a young Sikh wishing to wear a kirpan in a school in Quebec. For the school authorities, the kirpan is a weapon, while for the Sikh community, it is a religious symbol.
Indeed, on the one hand, carrying knives in public or in a public place, hidden or not, is generally prohibited in Quebec, (except in the woods or forests), while the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms recognizes the right to freely practise their religion. Faced with the refusal of the school to accommodate the young Sikh and a lawsuit, the media began to look into the case.
Faced with the refusal of the school to accommodate the young Sikh and a lawsuit, the media began to look into the case. At the end of the trial, media, the young Sikh has been brought to the school a kirpan in a wooden sheath placed inside a bag of cloth sewn in order not to be opened. It is however important to note that the Supreme Court in this decision, only by analogy the concept of reasonable accommodation, as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms deals rather to "reasonable limits" to fundamental rights. It is also surprising that the Supreme Court upheld the ban to wear the kirpan in the courts and in aircraft!
In 2006, Quebec, the concept of reasonable accommodation has been growing for several reasons: economic growth, population growth and integration of disabled and ethnic and religious minorities within the institutions. They are questioning what is called the Quebec model. Let's see, for example, what it is with immigration politics.
In order to increase the active population, Quebec is pursuing a policy favourable to the arrival of immigrants. Because of the predominance of English, they come chiefly from West and south of the Mediterranean. However, the Maghreb (Algeria and Morocco) are predominantly Muslim and some of them actively practicing their religion, despite the fact that they expressed to almost 85% laity.
A minority of them are demanding respect for their religious rights, which cause, we all know, a certain discomfort among the population, which is predominantly a Christian, and also secular to over 90% . Government authorities are trying by various means, laws, policies and education campaigns, eliminate barriers to their integration.
But after some requests and complaints from ethnic or religious groups, considered by the media and mass as excessive, intrusive and sometimes against the values and achievements of Quebecers, and which sometimes have struck the freedom of certain individuals, including many groups of women, unconnected with the groups in question, the term "reasonable accommodation" has acquired a pejorative connotation often, sometimes threatening to see some legacies of Quebec.
We must add that since 2006, the term is abused. Thus, several media have described as a measure of reasonable accommodation that the windows of an exercise room where trained women in tee-shirt and shorts, have been frosted at the request of a group Hassidic Jews.
Other actions more disturbing, as in Sainte-Therese, where nurses should wear long sleeves and long pants in workplaces even during periods of hot weather, as demand from a group of Hassidic Jews of Boisbriand.
Then some people will recall that in September, in some secondary schools' public-Basses Laurentides, a tour of various agencies as Chastity Quebec, and countless fundamentalist groups causing the "isolation" of women in the workplace and in the family life.
And finally the case of a secondary school in Lanaudière will be shocked an entire community around Sainte-Julienne, where the school is placed in a position of "reasonable accommodation" when asked a severe restructuring dress code school after a religious community evangelist whose only 2.4% of students are members, in the flattest excuse to maintain the "young boys of the community" on the right path of chastity away from defect the temptation of the flesh pleasure.
After all these cases listed, why do we have imposed 95% of the secular population to 5% of religious fundamentalists, whatever the religion, some process changes? Like me, many people will not confine their wife or their daughters in the wardrobe for the whims of some verses of Psalms or whatever religious structure.
We must maintain our tolerance for multiculturalism and diversity, and not to fall into the trap of racism and fundamentalism. But religious fundamentalism in Canada has no place.
Labels: Canada, Francis Chartrand, Hostile races, New Democratic Party, Québec, Religion and fanaticism, Secularism
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]