Pubdate: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) Copyright: 1999 The Ottawa Citizen Contact: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/ Author: April Lindgren, The Ottawa Citizen WELFARE DRUG TESTS COULD BE ILLEGAL Human Rights board says tests discriminate TORONTO -- The Ontario government's promise to introduce mandatory drug testing and treatment for welfare recipients could run afoul of the law, the province's human rights commissioner warned yesterday. The courts and human rights tribunals have ruled that drug addiction is a handicap, commissioner Keith Norton said at a news conference, where he released the annual report of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Mr. Norton said the government's plan to deny welfare to anyone who refuses drug testing and treatment "might ultimately be struck down in the courts because ... it offends human rights legislation and discriminates against persons with disabilities (by) making them ineligible for social assistance." Mr. Norton first laid out his concerns in a July 27 letter to Social Services Minister John Baird. The minister yesterday said Mr. Norton's concerns would be considered, but he insisted the plan will go ahead. "It would be easier to sit back ... to say that the welfare rolls are down 40 per cent and to walk away and declare victory. We want to help more people move from welfare to work." About 600,000 people are dependent on welfare in Ontario, down from about a million in 1995 when the Conservatives were elected. Mr. Baird said he didn't know when the policy would be introduced and he avoided saying whether he thinks crack cocaine users and other addicts are handicapped. "I think someone who is addicted to crack cocaine and is on welfare needs help ... and our government wants to be there to provide that assistance." The report comes just a day after the province complied with a Supreme Court of Canada decision that said laws treating heterosexual relationships differently from gay and lesbian relationships are unconstitutional. Mr. Norton welcomed the legislation before highlighting other concerns, including the rights of transsexuals. "They are clearly one of the most marginalized groups remaining in our society. They are very, very poorly understood, they suffer tremendous discrimination and trauma in the workplace" and often in medical services where doctors often don't understand gender confusion, he said. Mr. Norton said commission staff is working on a policy clarifying the rights of such individuals. The commission, with an annual budget of about $11 million, opened 1,850 cases in 1998-1999 and resolved 2,218 through strategies ranging from mediation to a full inquiry. Race-related complaints were the most common grounds for discrimination claims, making up 27 per cent of the total. Another 25 per cent claimed discrimination on the basis of handicaps, while 16 per cent related to sex or pregnancy. The commission's notorious backlog has shrunk to 2,400 cases, including 109 that are three years old or more. It now takes just under a year for new cases to be settled, he said. The average settlement for 376 cases mediated by the commission last year was $5,600. In other cases, the commission issued rulings. Examples include: - - A decision in favour of a man of East Indian origin from Guyana who alleged his working environment at Ford Motor Company in Windsor was poisoned by racist graffiti and racist comments directed at him and other visible minority employees. He also charged that he was given inferior work assignments and training and subjected to a higher level of discipline that ultimately led to his dismissal following an altercation with a co-worker. The commission ruled that there was a poisoned work environment. The company was ordered to reinstate the employee and to pay him $30,000 in general damages, $20,000 as compensation for "the experience of victimization" and $10,000 for mental anguish. - - A ruling in favour of a complainant whose young daughter was allowed only limited use of recreational facilities in a Toronto condominium. The commission said rules restricting use for children under 16 were not reasonable. It ordered the payment of $500 in general damages and said at least one place on the recreation committee should be available to a condo owner with a child under 16. - - The commission ruled in favour of a woman who complained that the Ontario legislative assembly unfairly extended her probationary period after a high-risk pregnancy forced her to stop work. - --- MAP posted-by: Derek Rea