Scenario I Flashcards
Crystal is a new employee in the research and development department of Medrox, a large medical equipment manufacturer located in Ottawa. After 2 months on the job, Crystal is struggling to adjust to her new position and is having a hard time with her duties. Her manager, Haziq, wants to address these performance issues and asks Andrea, one of Medrox’s HR professionals, for her assistance. Andrea and Haziq meet with Crystal to discuss their concerns. During the meeting, Crystal discloses that she suffers from a medical condition that, while not immediately evident, often leaves her in great pain and makes it hard for her to concentrate. Crystal explains this condition has made it difficult for her to focus on her work and complete it on time. Upon hearing this, Haziq wants to terminate Crystal, as he believes she has the potential to be a very costly employee for the company. However, Andrea believes Medrox should accommodate Crystal’s condition, and she immediately enrols Crystal in the company’s program for employees with disabilities. The program provides Crystal with longer breaks, a special computer, and more ergonomic seating. In addition, Andrea sets out to learn all she can about accommodating employees with disabilities so that she can better help Crystal unlock her full potential. During her research, Andrea discovers that the principle of accommodation involves 3 factors. What are they? a) Dignity, inclusion, and fairness. b) Inclusion, equity, and individualization. c) Dignity, inclusion, and individualization.
The answer is c. Dignity, inclusion, and individualization. Functional Area: B1 Rationale(s): A is incorrect. While one should always strive for a fair workplace, fairness is not one of the factors that form the principle of accommodation. B is incorrect. Equity is required in a workplace, but it is not one of the factors that form the principle of accommodation. C is correct. Dignity, inclusion, and individualization are the factors that form the principle of accommodation. Reference(s) Unit 9: Human Rights and Accommodations, Module 4: The Duty to Accommodate. Ontario Human Rights Commission: “8. Meeting the accommodation needs of employees on the job”, Human Rights at Work 2008 — Third Edition, Part IV (http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/iv-human-rights-issues-all-stages-employment/8-meeting-accommodation-needs-employees-job).
Crystal is a new employee in the research and development department of Medrox, a large medical equipment manufacturer located in Ottawa. After 2 months on the job, Crystal is struggling to adjust to her new position and is having a hard time with her duties. Her manager, Haziq, wants to address these performance issues and asks Andrea, one of Medrox’s HR professionals, for her assistance. Andrea and Haziq meet with Crystal to discuss their concerns. During the meeting, Crystal discloses that she suffers from a medical condition that, while not immediately evident, often leaves her in great pain and makes it hard for her to concentrate. Crystal explains this condition has made it difficult for her to focus on her work and complete it on time. Upon hearing this, Haziq wants to terminate Crystal, as he believes she has the potential to be a very costly employee for the company. However, Andrea believes Medrox should accommodate Crystal’s condition, and she immediately enrols Crystal in the company’s program for employees with disabilities. The program provides Crystal with longer breaks, a special computer, and more ergonomic seating. In addition, Andrea sets out to learn all she can about accommodating employees with disabilities so that she can better help Crystal unlock her full potential. When advising Hazig against terminating Crystal, Andrea cites the case of Mercier v. Montreal. What is the key issue in Mercier that Andrea believes is relevant to Crystal’s situation? a) Not giving reasonable notice period. b) Disability need not be readily apparent. c) Insufficient accommodation has been made.
The answer is b. Disability need not be readily apparent. Functional Area: B1 Rationale(s): A is incorrect. This case deals with reasonable notice periods. B is correct. This case helped confirm that disabilities need not be readily apparent and the focus should not be on proving one has a disability. C is incorrect. This case deals primarily with inducement. Reference(s): Unit 9: Human Rights and Accommodation, Module 3: Disabilities. Mercier v. Montreal, 2000 SCC 27.
Crystal is a new employee in the research and development department of Medrox, a large medical equipment manufacturer located in Ottawa. After 2 months on the job, Crystal is struggling to adjust to her new position and is having a hard time with her duties. Her manager, Haziq, wants to address these performance issues and asks Andrea, one of Medrox’s HR professionals, for her assistance. Andrea and Haziq meet with Crystal to discuss their concerns. During the meeting, Crystal discloses that she suffers from a medical condition that, while not immediately evident, often leaves her in great pain and makes it hard for her to concentrate. Crystal explains this condition has made it difficult for her to focus on her work and complete it on time. Upon hearing this, Haziq wants to terminate Crystal, as he believes she has the potential to be a very costly employee for the company. However, Andrea believes Medrox should accommodate Crystal’s condition, and she immediately enrols Crystal in the company’s program for employees with disabilities. The program provides Crystal with longer breaks, a special computer, and more ergonomic seating. In addition, Andrea sets out to learn all she can about accommodating employees with disabilities so that she can better help Crystal unlock her full potential. After a couple of months, Crystal does not seem to be responding well to the company’s accommodation program and her performance problems persist. What should Andrea have done differently in this situation? a) She should have talked with Crystal and developed individualized accommodations for her. b) She should have made sure that Crystal was a good fit for the program before enrolling her in it. c) She should not have done anything differently; some employees simply cannot be accommodated with positive results.
The answer is a. She should have talked with Crystal and developed individualized accommodations for her. Functional Area: B1 Rationale(s): A is correct. Accommodations should always be tailored to the employee. HR professionals should avoid using a one-size-fits-all approach. B is incorrect. This is still an attempt to shoehorn an employee into a one-size-fits-all solution. C is incorrect. Most employees can be accommodated, unless doing so presents an undue hardship. Reference(s) Unit 9: Human Rights and Accommodations, Module 4: The Duty to Accommodate.
Crystal is a new employee in the research and development department of Medrox, a large medical equipment manufacturer located in Ottawa. After 2 months on the job, Crystal is struggling to adjust to her new position and is having a hard time with her duties. Her manager, Haziq, wants to address these performance issues and asks Andrea, one of Medrox’s HR professionals, for her assistance. Andrea and Haziq meet with Crystal to discuss their concerns. During the meeting, Crystal discloses that she suffers from a medical condition that, while not immediately evident, often leaves her in great pain and makes it hard for her to concentrate. Crystal explains this condition has made it difficult for her to focus on her work and complete it on time. Upon hearing this, Haziq wants to terminate Crystal, as he believes she has the potential to be a very costly employee for the company. However, Andrea believes Medrox should accommodate Crystal’s condition, and she immediately enrols Crystal in the company’s program for employees with disabilities. The program provides Crystal with longer breaks, a special computer, and more ergonomic seating. In addition, Andrea sets out to learn all she can about accommodating employees with disabilities so that she can better help Crystal unlock her full potential. What could Crystal have done differently to help improve her own performance? a) She could have sought employment where her disability would not have impeded her ability to fulfill her duties. b) She could have communicated her accommodation needs to the best of her ability earlier on. c) She could have informed her employer of her disability in her initial application package.
The answer is b. She could have communicated her accommodation needs to the best of her ability earlier on. Functional Area: B1 Rationale(s): A is incorrect. Crystal has no obligation to do this. B is correct. The accommodation process is a shared responsibility, and a person with a disability is required to help come up with an accommodation solution. C is incorrect. Crystal is under no obligation to disclose her disabilities on her initial application. Reference(s) Unit 9: Human Rights and Accommodations, Module 4: The Duty to Accommodate. Government of Canada: “The Fundamentals — Duty to Accommodate: Roles and Responsibilities” (https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/values-ethics/diversity-equity/disability-management/fundamentals-duty-accommodate-roles-responsibilities.html#Toc297620654). Ontario Human Rights Commission: “8.6 Duties and responsibilities in the accommodation process”, Policy on Ableism and Discrimination Based on Disability (http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/policy-ableism-and-discrimination-based-disability/8-duty-accommodate). 4.4 Duties and responsibilities in the accommodation process”, Policy and Guidelines on Disability and the Duty to Accommodate (http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/book/export/html/2461).
