5 Rules on How to be Untouchable

(Or at least try to be…)

The school district and their lawyers are just waiting for you to do any of the following things listed below…literally sitting back, fingers crossed and waiting. They know what works. They do this all the time.

They can use your own decisions against you in multiple ways. Destroying your credibility at a hearing, filing a section 177 against you, getting your human rights complaint completely dismissed and with costs, shutting down complete communication with you, sending you a cease and desist letter or threatening a defamation lawsuit.

(And before we go any further, trust me, this blog is not from personal experience. For those of you who know which school district I am connected to, please don’t infer, none of these things have happened to me.)

This blog is from reading case law, newspaper articles, finding websites/YouTube videos of pissed-off parents and hearing their stories, hearing stories directly from other parents, and hearing through the grapevine ALLLLL of the multiple other stories floating around our community. This by the way is a national issue, not just a BC issue. So, if you are sitting in a small town in PEI, this stuff still applies.

To the people waiting for you to do any of these things… this is a chess game. It’s not a chess game to us, and its a hard pill to swollow just how strategic navigating the maze needs to be, but we need to realize that this is how its viewed by them. And we need to figure out what the rules are and follow them.

When we follow the rules, we are closer to being untouchable, and we can continue to advocate.

Here we go.

Rule #1Always be polite and respectful.

  1. Don’t be rude. Be polite and respectful. Always.
  • Losing your cool and sending in an email that is just blasting them, insulting them, threatening them, etc, etc. is an easy way for them to be all over you and be backed up by the tribunal and court system. This will open the door for them to file a dismissal and get your case dismissed and apply for costs, file a section 177 etc, etc. They are literally hoping you go this route and you make it really easy for them to control you. They can’t wait for this to happen.
  • Sending in your emails doesn’t need to align with exactly how you feel. Your emails need to be written with strategy in mind. Your intent can be to either to document what is happening with the purpose of gathering evidence, to communicate your child’s unmet needs in ways that they can’t claim hindsight later on and trigger meaningful inquiry, to be problem-solving to resolve the immediate issues at hand etc. But making yourself feel better to release the stress valve has the potential of undermining your advocacy and destroying the opportunity for the systemic changes that you are hoping for.
  • It’s a painful part of the advocacy process to think so strategically, but this skill is really really important. I think of it as, we need to become Cheetahs. Cheetahs are loving parents, and affectionate with their young. They are also the most extremely patient and strategic hunters. We need to be cheetahs for maximum efficiency. We can’t let our advocacy efforts be undermined and swept aside because we lose our shit. They will poke us and poke us and just wait for us to explode. We need to have other release values and when we interact with them, we are in cheetah mode.

Rule #2No defamation, no naming

2. Don’t name or defame anyone on social media.

  • Defamation is a really easy hook to get you on. Defamation just needs to be said to one other person. It is ridiculous how fast they will jump on this.

See news article below, click to read.

Mom threatened with legal action after questioning B.C. principal who’s now accused of misappropriation
2014 letter from school board lawyer warned against ‘defamatory statements’ about Tricia Rooney
  • That means on any social media site, in conversations with anyone else, you CAN’T name people. You are making yourself way too easy of a target.
  • I took a workshop on defamation. Here are my notes.
  • If you are in a heated battle with the school, keep your circle very small on who you let in. These need to be trusted people in your life. You can talk about your situation, just don’t name anyone.
  • Having fake social media accounts can be ways of interacting with support group FB accounts or posting anonymously can be a layer of protection that will aid in your untouchability.
  • Parents have had human rights cases dismissed and their social media posts were used against them.
  • Trust me, they troll your social media when you become a red flag to them.
  • You never know who is in a Facebook group. Just like it is easy for a parent to make a fake account to protect themselves, it’s easy for anyone to make a fake Facebook account. Facebook groups are public, not private.

Rule #3Don’t share confidential information

3. Don’t post content on social media that has the words CONFIDENTIAL on it. This again opens you up to them being able to threaten you with legal action and having the ability to control you.

  • This includes anything from the government that is sent to you in a password protected file or simply has the words CONFIDENTIAL at the top.
  • And yes… this is how the system stays in control and keeps everything hidden. I know. If you want to present this information as evidence in a hearing, that’s a different story. Stuff that is hidden away under privacy laws can still be used as evidence at tribunal hearings and court proceedings. This again is about being strategic about what we do. Be the cheetah. Wait it out. If you play the chess game right, you’ll be able to present the evidence when you need to and maximize your efficiency.

Rule #4Don’t protest

4. Do not protest a decision in a school by refusing to leave, or forcing your way into a classroom. Refusing to pick up your kid in the name of protest, I also don’t suggest. You are setting yourself up for a section 177 and you will be accused of not working in good faith with the school, you will not be following your duty to facilitate and your human rights complaint has the potential of being dismissed. If you refuse to pick up your child without good reason in the name of protesting, MFCD may be called.

  • Even if you adamantly disagree with the a decision that the school has made, they have the power to make those decisions whether you agree or not. It’s risky for them if they didn’t meaningfully consult with you, but the School Act and Supreme Court of Canada, do give them the power to make class placement decisions and reasonable accommodation decisions.
  • The only way to maintain your credibility and access to the school is to follow the internal and external complaint systems in a civil manner. I know, that they are the ones controlling the system and this isn’t going to be fair. Totally get it. It doesn’t matter. If you want to give them even more power and have them cut you off at the knees then behaving in a way that makes you non-compliant, or the staff don’t feel physically or psychologically safe around you will end up being a gift to them. It will be so easy for them to file a section 177. Next time you show up at the school the police will be called and you’ll be out the door so fast. Don’t do them any favors. Collect your evidence and nail them in due course. Patience.

Rule #5Knowledge and your values are power

5. This rule isn’t a rule on not what to do, this is a rule on what to do. This will also help to make you feel personally untouchable.

  • Know your stuff. That means human rights law, duty to accommodate, and external complaint avenues. Learn as much as you can. Knowledge is power. Ground your arguments in evidence and documentation. Stick to the facts. Don’t over-exaggerate. Don’t lie. Your credibility is everything.
  • This to me personally, is so important. Following your values is the most powerful tool to be untouchable. When you align your advocacy with your values, and how you want to treat people, strength is unlimited. What is your fuel? Unfairness? Systemic oppression? Lying? Even though people may be playing dirty with you, or lying to you, navigating your advocacy with how you want to operate and interact with people can give you a sense of emotional untouchability. It’s called inner peace. And it’s priceless.

Be one with the Cheetah.
Make it hard for them.
Don’t be easy prey.
You’ve got this.

Why Can’t we Just Sue the Government?

Good question!

Many parent(s)/guardians are asking this question. What they are experiencing in the education system is mass systemic discrimination and they are wondering how in the world is this allowed to happen?? Doesn’t the Charter protect our rights?

I hope this blog is used as a launching pad for discussion. I encourage people to be critical of this blog, question it, challenge it, and be curious about what I could be missing. What’s your opinion??

Let’s tear this question to bits.

Why can’t we just sue the government?

Funding

  1. A large majority of parents want to sue the government over lack of funding, EA support so their children can get an education. Something connected to scarce resources. They feel that resources are not being distributed fairly and people with disabilities aren’t getting their needs met and this is discrimination.

When you sue the government it needs to meet a specific legal test. We can’t just sue for lack of funding. If we could, any non-profit organization that felt they weren’t getting enough funding would be suing. That would be all of them. All non-profit organizations of marginalized community groups need more funding and feel they are never getting enough to service their community who are facing lots of discriminatory situations. They are all understaffed. All competing for grants. All desperate. All good and worthy causes. All justified. Yet still… not getting the funding to meet the needs of their community. Keep reading, I’ll explain further.

Quality of Life

2. Something to keep in mind, the government doesn’t owe us a certain standard of living. There is no legislation or law on this. We know this because people are sleeping on the streets and they can’t sue the government for being in that position.

Democracy & Charter of Rights

3. Our government works as a democracy. The system that we have to express our dislike over how the government spends our money, is through voting, contacting your MLA, or peaceful protesting. Other social movement activities like signing petitions, or starting your own non-profit organizations to work with other community members to advocate are all “system” approved ways of furthering your cause. As we will read below in case law, courts will not tell the government how to spend their money when it’s connected to resources in dealing with inequity. The government is allowed to take a “one-step” at a time approach when addressing issues of inequality. They are allowed to determine how to spend society’s limited resources and create social policy when choosing between disadvantaged groups. Something to keep in mind, our system is set up as a separation of powers between the government and the court system. The “conversation” that happens back and forth between courts and the government creating laws is often referred to as the democratic dialogue. See the two Supreme Court of Canada decisions related to Charter Challenges below.

Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. N.A.P.E., 2004 SCC 66 (CanLII), [2004] 3 SCR 381

[75] [I]t is not realistic for the Court to assume that there are unlimited funds to address the needs of all.”

[79] While purely financial considerations are not sufficient to justify the infringement of Charter rights, they are relevant to determining the standard of deference for the test of minimal impairment when reviewing legislation which is enacted for a purpose which is not financial.

[83] It is also clear that while financial considerations alone may not justify Charter infringements . . . governments must be afforded wide latitude to determine the proper distribution of resources in society . . .  This is especially true where Parliament, in providing specific social benefits, has to choose between disadvantaged groups . . . .

Fraser V. Canada [2020] SCC 28

207 ]                      Governments must be afforded the latitude to act incrementally when addressing a deeply ingrained, complex and persistent social phenomenon such as inequality. (This assumes that the inequality arises from factors in society; where the government itself has created the inequality, matters are, as we have already indicated, somewhat different.) There are processes by which a government must set its priorities, allocate its budget, and obtain parliamentary approval of its programs. In designing legislation to address a particular equality issue, a government can draw on far more internal and external expertise than we judges can. As a result, it is better positioned than we are to appreciate the consequences of a particular course of law‑making, both upon society and upon public resources. With these practical realities in mind, we must also recognize that, were a government expected to remove all inequalities for all groups on every occasion it acted, it may be disinclined to act, given that any remedial scheme will inevitably be under‑inclusive in some respect. Governments would, understandably, become “reluctant to create any new [remedial] benefit schemes because their limits would depend on an accurate prediction of the outcome of court proceedings under s. 15(1) of the Charter ” ( Egan v. Canada , [1995] 2 SCR 513, at para. 104, per Sopinka J.).

208 ]                      To avoid this chilling effect, and to encourage governments to enact remedial legislation addressing pre‑existing disadvantage, this Court has (until now) judiciously accepted that governments may implement reforms “one step at a time, [and] address[s ] [the reforms] to the phase of the problem which seems most acute to the legislative mind” ( R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd. , [1986] 2 SCR 713, at p. 772, quoting Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma , 348 US 483 (1955), at p. The focal point in assessing remedial legislation is not to ask whether the government has met “the gold standard”Auton , at para. 62; see also paras. 59-61), but to recognize that government should not be obliged to deal with all aspects of a problem at once. It must surely be permitted to take incremental measures. It must be given reasonable leeway to deal with problems one step at a time, to balance possible inequalities under the law against other inequalities resulting from the adoption of a course of action, and to take account of the difficulties, whether social, economic or budgetary , that would arise if it attempted to deal with social and economic problems in their entirety, assuming such problems can ever be perceived in their entirety. [Emphasis added.]

213 ] …..This is because only legislatures have the institutional capacity to conduct the research and study necessary to assess how, and at what pace, its resources should be applied to most effectively address a particular pre‑existing equality issue (and ultimately, to oversee that implementation) . Courts are not well placed to define the nature and scope of an obligation to enact 
sufficiently remedial legislation (Ferrel v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1998), 42 OR (3d) 97 (CA), at p. 113).

[229 ] Similar issues will undoubtedly arise with any other social welfare legislation or government attempts to remedy systemic disadvantage. By reserving the right to arbitrarily second‑guess and undo any legislation that attempts to incrementally address systemic disadvantage, the Court makes it more practically difficult for legislatures and governments to implement policies that promote equality. Put simply, we see restricting the government’s ability to incrementally address disadvantage as a peculiar way to promote equality.

Human Rights Cases Involving Ministry of Education

4. Every single human rights case that I have read across Canada, that has included the provincial Ministry of Education in their complaint, has been dismissed. If their complaint continues, the Ministry of Education is never involved. I haven’t read one case where the Ministry of Education was included. The Ministry gives the funding to the districts and the districts decide how to allocate the money, which removes the Ministry of Education from decisions that would pull them into the human rights complaints about kids not accessing needed resources.

5. I know someone who had the opportunity to consult a lawyer regarding this matter. They were told a way to file a class action human rights complaint that could involve the Ministry of Education is if the Ministry have policy that is discriminatory. This route is still possible if they do this.

Human Rights Process

6. I have been asked, why can’t we just file a class action human rights complaint against the Ministry of Education? So we have established, it would need to be something like a discriminatory policy in order for it to be connected to the Ministry. If there is a group of parents who want to file a class action human rights complaint who wants to create a decision from the tribunal, we would need to find a group of parents who were potentially prepared for a 8-10-year fight. Right now, just for a single complaint to reach a hearing level at the BC HRT, it will take about 4-5 years according to flow chart produced by the BC Human Rights Clinic. It could take a year for the tribunal to write a decision, if not more. This case took 15 months for the tribunal to write up the decision. Especially if it was a class-action human rights complaint it could be long and complex. Class action lawsuits tend to be long. Lawyers fees for one parent I know, was given an estimate for $30,000 for hearing preparation and a $10,000 per day for a hearing. So this group of parents would need to be prepared to spend thousands of dollars, agree to not accept any settlement, and continue along to a hearing. OR they would need to be ready to self-represent themselves. OR they could find a unicorn of a lawyer willing to do pro-bono work. (So many parents have had their pro-bono lawyer drop them before a hearing. We would need to find someone willing to commit for the long haul for free.) After the BC HRT decision is posted, the Ministry could possibly file a judicial review after the decision. With a class action decision, the compensation money might be large enough or the precedent be enough that they view it worthwhile to pursue further. That would launch it now to the BC Supreme Court for more legal fees and more time…. and even with all that, a policy change would affect only those impacted by the policy and wouldn’t make the systemic change that parents are looking for when they ask the question, why can’t we just sue the government? If parents want a policy change, I wonder if it would be best to file a single complaint and get the policy change during a settlement mediation meeting. It would be so much faster and they could get the policy change that they need much faster so it could impact their children. Not 10 years later. The very system that is intended to resolve discriminatory issues can be a barrier itself.

Courts & Education

7. Generally, the courts don’t like education cases. It depends on what you are suing for and what the legal test is.

For example: Educational Malpractice

Gould v. Regina (East) School Division No. 77, 1996 CanLII 6807 (SK KB)

“The courts are an inappropriate forum to test the
efficacy of educational programs and pedagogical methods.
That judicial interference would be the inevitable result of
the recognition of a legal duty of care is clear from the fact
that in presenting their case, plaintiffs would, of necessity,
call upon jurors to decide whether they should have been
taught one subject instead of another, or whether one teaching
method was more appropriate than another, or whether certain
tests should have been administered or test results
interpreted in one way rather than another, and so on, ad
infinitum.  It simply is not within the judicial function to
evaluate conflicting theories of how best to educate.  Even if
it were possible to determine with exactitude the pedagogical
course to follow with respect to particular individuals, yet
another problem would arise.  Public education involves an
inherent stress between taking action to satisfy the
educational needs of the individual student and the needs of
the student body as a whole. It is not for the courts to
determine how best to utilize scarce educational resources to
achieve these sometimes conflicting objectives.
  Simply
stated, the recognition of a cause of action sounding in
negligence to recover for “educational malpractice” would
impermissibly require the courts to oversee the administration
of the State’s public school system.

Costs & Risk

8. If we did want to try and sue the government via the court system and not the human rights route, we would need to be prepared for it to possibly be tossed out. That wouldn’t be such a bad risk to take, however, if we lose the respondents will ask the courts that we pay their legal fees. Which can happen for the losing party in court cases. You’ll want to read this link. Costs are awarded to the successful party.

The CharterLimited

9. What I learned from my human rights law class was that we don’t just have open-ended rights under the Charter, our rights are how they are DEFINED under the Charter. And that is case law. Case law tells us how our rights to not be discriminated against is defined. An example of this definition is the case Eaton v. Brant County Board of Education, 1997 CanLII 366 (SCC), [1997] 1 SCR 241. This case famously defined reasonable accommodations and separate classes for students with a disability as a reasonable accommodation due to what is considered reasonable and best interest of the child. All of the human rights cases that make it to hearings are what define our rights under the law too. These definitions and interpretations of law are important. (Duty to accommodate) Each decision defines our rights.

10. Also an important part of the Charter to understand is Section One – Reasonable Limits. The purpose of this “Section 1 effects a balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of society by permitting limits to be placed on guaranteed rights and freedoms. “Most modern constitutions recognize that rights are not absolute and can be limited if this is necessary to achieve an important objective and if the limit is appropriately tailored, or proportionate. (Canada (Attorney General) v. JTI-Macdonald Corp., [2007] 2 SCR 610, at paragraph 36).”

To take a Charter challenge all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada it would be a 10-year fight, we would need a pro bono lawyer, and based on the case law I have seen, I am not aware of any case law that would be substantial in helping us to force the government to increase funding and resources for kids with disabilities in education.

11. Law isn’t the magic bullet that people tend to think it is. Laws can come into force but they need to be APPLIED for them to have an impact. That means that advocacy around using these laws will still need to happen. Law is a tool for us to use. The system needs to uphold these laws through its systems and accountability design. If the system doesn’t uphold a new law, it won’t be the magic we want it to be. We have laws that say it’s illegal to discriminate, and yet it still happens every day. We still need to change people’s hearts and minds. Law is a start, but it is just the beginning of the work. We need to take these laws and apply them. Laws won’t fix everything, but they are hugely important. We need a social movement AND laws. We need to use every avenue we have. I think of the parachute activities I used to play with my kids at Strong Start centers. We’d all have a piece of the very large parachute to hold onto and put the ball in and bounce it around. We all need to lift and do the work together if we want to keep the ball of inclusion on the parachute. We all need to be in our own corners, all lifting together simultaneously. All of the work done at BCCPAC, parent advocacy groups, advocacy organizations, human rights work, BC Ed Access, School Trustees, BCTF, Teacher’s unions, Post-secondary teacher education programs, EA programs, Professional Support Staff, Counsellors, Ministry of Education and Child Care, accessibility committees, and individual parents, all of us.

So now what?

This part is my opinion and experience. The soft spot of the education system is money. The people in power care about money.

It needs to become more expensive and time-consuming to deal with the consequences of discriminating against students with disabilities. Providing an inclusive education needs to become easier and less expensive. Which means to me, through my lens…. human rights complaints. LOTS OF THEM.

I can tell you 100%, and I have witnessed these meetings, that when systems get too many human rights complaints and their litigation costs go through the roof, then and only then do they start to look at how they can make policy changes to reduce the number of human rights complaints. I don’t care what their motivation is, the results are still the same. Policy in the right direction. Staff training. This is what it seems to take.

Human Rights complaints have the potential of being very expensive, as we advance the purpose of the Code and create those gold nugget decisions.

Dealing with ableism is slow and painful work. But necessary. Social movements are like that.

Every little bit of advocacy we do, all adds up. It all matters. Every bit of human rights law advancements, every decision, every DPAC inclusion meeting, every email to your MLA or school Trustee, every advocacy advancement you make, every time you support another parent. All of it.

We need an army of informed and empowered parents, spreading out and reaching all the corners of the province.

For those of you who are willing and able to get in the ring and make discrimination expensive, hats off to you, we need you. File away.

SOCIAL MOVEMENT + HUMAN RIGHTS LAW = MORE EQUITY, LESS ABLEISM

Top 10 Truths – My Learnings

For parents of kids with disabilities/neurodiversities, our participation in our children’s education is WAAAAAYYYY different compared to parents of neurotypical/non-disabled children.

For blog post on that topic: The Non-Death Loss for Parents of Disabled Children in Education, All Over this Province

Here are my top 10 learnings for me.

  1. Teachers and counsellors aren’t nearly as educated in disability and mental health issues as I assumed. I gave them way more credit and trust than I should have.

2. My advocacy of applying the Duty to Accommodate was essential to my children getting an education. The difference between my advocacy efforts pre-using human rights law and post-using human rights law is night and day.

3. The human rights code supersedes classroom teacher’s autonomy.

4. Generally, education staff know very little about human rights law and education law. This is truly a failing. This type of education wouldn’t be complex to teach either. I think districts would save themselves so much money and complexities if their staff were more aware. This can all be taught in a simple 2-hour workshop.

5. Find an advocacy buddy. Another parent out there who knows what you are going through is essential for survival. I had no idea this was exactly what I needed and I am so glad she found me.

6. I had no idea learning about external complaint systems would be so vital.

7. Through everything, I would need to find the good people in the education system and stick to them like glue. There are really good people out there. Rare birds. Diamonds. And the system is killing them slowly.

8. We need our own care plans. Kids get IEPs for education. We need PCPs (Parent Care Plan). We need steps, strategies, and a review every few months.

9. I had no idea I was this strong, this determined, this capable. I have more layers to me than I ever thought.

10. I love my children. I love your children. And I will fight for both.

The BC Human Rights Code Supersedes ALL other Laws, if Conflict Arises

This is the BC Human Rights Code.

Code prevails

4  If there is a conflict between this Code and any other enactment, this Code prevails.”

This is why human rights law is our strongest form of advocacy.

It doesn’t matter what the school policies are.

It doesn’t even matter what the policies are that are written by the Ministry of Education and Child Care.

It doesn’t even matter what the School Act says.

The Human Rights Code supersedes everything.

The Supreme Court of Canada has already made it crystal clear. It supersedes all laws.

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v. Heerspink, 1982 CanLII 27 (SCC), [1982] 2 SCR 145

The Human Rights Code of British Columbia

When the subject matter of a law is said to be the comprehensive statement of the “human rights” of the people living in that jurisdiction,

[Page 158]

then there is no doubt in my mind that the people of that jurisdiction have through their legislature clearly indicated that they consider that law, and. the values it endeavours to buttress and protect, are, save their constitutional laws, more important than all others. Therefore, short of that legislature speaking to the contrary in express and unequivocal language in the Code or in some other enactment, it is intended that the Code supersede all other laws when conflict arises.”

Even the Accessible BC Act.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/…/accessibility/legislation/summary

Scroll down to almost the bottom.

Why doesn’t the law mention the Human Rights Code?

In British Columbia, the Human Rights Code prevails over all other laws. This is written in the Human Rights Code. Repeating this in the proposed law would not change this and may cause further confusion.

Not all education staff are aware of human rights and specifically human rights and how it is applied in education.

I offer you three links of education law.

Duty to Accommodate – https://www.kbpath.com/information/

Education Law – https://www.kbpath.com/education-law/

Understanding Exclusion – https://www.speakingupbc.com/understanding-exclusion/

All of our human rights education law is written in case law created by tribunal members when they make their decisions.

Yes, our children are protected by the human rights code, but these rights are not limitless. Our children’s rights are protected as they are DEFINED under the human rights code.

That means their rights are limited by the legal test that the BC Human Rights Tribunal uses, under the Code. You are not allowed to discriminate against our kids in school, without a bona fide and reasonable justification. And that leads us to read case law to find out, what that means. Lots of case law. That leads us to the Duty to Accommodate to explain what the school is responsible for and what we are responsible for.

So that means…

If the school is quoting their school district policy about not having parents attend an IEP meeting, that will conflict with the duty to meaningful consultation that is defined by case law. Hewko v. B.C., 2006 BCSC 1638 para 343-361.

It doesn’t matter what policy says what, they need to engage in meaningful consultation with us, as defined by human rights law.

In the same breath, I can assure you, that teacher classroom autonomy does not supersede the human rights code. So no matter what teachers think about their classroom autonomy rights, the Human Rights Code supersedes all of that, and your child’s human rights are above their preferences of how they manage their classroom.

It really is a systemic failure that education staff know so little about human rights and their responsibilities. It shouldn’t fall on parents to teach them this.

Accommodations are not extras. They aren’t optional. They aren’t earned with good behaviour. Your child’s teacher has the legal responsibility to provide your child with an equitable education. Period.

If you feel your child is facing discrimination, not getting the accommodations they need and the school isn’t consulting with you, use human rights law to advocate for your right to be consulted with regarding your child’s education. And, if you want to file a human rights complaint, I suggest you contact the BC Human Rights Clinic for help.

Schools fall under the SERVICE category.

*********

Discrimination in accommodation, service and facility

8   (1)A person must not, without a bona fide and reasonable justification,

(a)deny to a person or class of persons any accommodation, service or facility customarily available to the public, or

(b)discriminate against a person or class of persons regarding any accommodation, service or facility customarily available to the public

because of the Indigenous identity, race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or age of that person or class of persons.

(2)A person does not contravene this section by discriminating

(a)on the basis of sex, if the discrimination relates to the maintenance of public decency or to the determination of premiums or benefits under contracts of life or health insurance, or

(b)on the basis of physical or mental disability or age, if the discrimination relates to the determination of premiums or benefits under contracts of life or health insurance.

************

To read case law decisions connected to human rights law, visit www.speakingupbc.com and go to my Human Rights Decisions (Cases) tab. This is not all cases, but I think it’s a great starting point.

Human rights-based advocacy is our sword and our shield.

#Education#Advocacy#HumanRights#Disability

News Articles on Recent Human Rights Partial Win by Parent in Education

January 3rd, 2024

Global BC: An unnamed school district in British Columbia has been ordered by the province’s human rights tribunal to pay $5,000 to a student for failing to accommodate her anxiety disorder.

Vancouver Sun – B.C. school district fined $5,000 for failing to address student’s anxiety

CBC – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Global News – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

National Post – School district must pay $5,000 to student with anxiety, B.C. rights tribunal rules

Chek News – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

SaskToday – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

BNN Breaking – British Columbia School District Ordered to Compensate Student with Anxiety Disorder

Cochrane Eagle – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Info News – BC high school student gets $5,000 after school ignored their anxiety

City News (Toronto) – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

City News (Kitchener) – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

City News (Halifax) – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Vancouver Is Awesome – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Toronto Star – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

The Brandon Sun – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Ottawa Sun – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Edmonton Journal – School district must pay $5,000 to student with anxiety, B.C. rights tribunal rules

Rd News Now (Red Deer) – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Meadowlake Now – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

The Free Press – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Castanet Kamloops – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

The Chronicle Journal – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

The Hamilton Spectator – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Toronto Sun – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Ground News – BC high school student gets $5,000 after school ignored their anxiety

The Province – B.C. school district fined $5,000 for failing to address student’s anxiety

Moose Jaw Today – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Nelson Star – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

St. Albert Gazette – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Ottawa Citizen – School district must pay $5,000 to student with anxiety, B.C. rights tribunal rules

The Star Phoenix – School district must pay $5,000 to student with anxiety, B.C. rights tribunal rules

Lethbridge Hearld – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Rocky Mountain Outlook – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Prince George Citizen – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Penticton Hearld – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Pelham Today – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

The Canadian Press – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Vernon Matters – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

The Calgary Sun – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Comox Valley Record – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Times Colonist – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Halton Hills Today – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

MSN – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Kamloops Now – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Powel River Peak – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Maple Ridge – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Langley Advance Times – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

New Westminster Record – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Surrey Now Leader – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Richmond News – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

North Shore News – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Delta Optimist – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

The Chilliwack Progress – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

The Burnaby Now – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Mission City Record – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Hope Standard – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

The Squamish Chief – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Kelowna Daily Courier – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Victoria News – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Vernon Morning Star – B.C. school district fined for failing to address student’s anxiety

Town and Country Today – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Timmins Today -B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

Bradford Today – B.C. school district told to pay student $5,000 for failing to address her anxiety

*** This is not the full list, but I just can’t keep up.

Law Blogs

HR Law Canada – January 4th, 2024

To NDA or not to NDA? That is the Question…

Here is a video on Non-Disclosure Agreements

I find this video fascinating and informative.

In the video, they report that “95% of people report consequences on their mental health” for signing an NDA.

About 3/4 way through they talk about what happens when people push back.

I highly recommend a viewing of this video for anyone going through the human rights tribunal or any kind of legal settlement/agreement process. There is a lot to consider, and a lot to discuss with your lawyer.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/VzfdVqp3Mxs?si=JwACOlntC3Ev1021

What You Need to Know About the Teacher’s Regulation Branch -Decision Letters (Professional Conduct Unit)

  1. The decision from the Commissioner if final and binding. There is nothing you can do to change it no matter how wrong you think it may be.
  2. You have two options after you receive the decision letter. You can either apply for a Judicial Review through the BC Supreme Court or file a complaint with Ombudsperson.
  3. For a Judicial Review there are a few things to note. As noted in this document from the BC Supreme Court on Judicial Reviews.

Page 3:

This is a look at whether the Commissioner errored in law and how it was applied. Not about the actual decision.

A Human Rights Lawyer told me that Judicial reviews are very risky as very rarely do the complainants win. The respondents can and will apply for costs to have their legal fees paid for. You as the parent will then need to pay. Legal fees can be tens of thousands of dollars.

I HIGHLY encourage parents/guardians who are considering this route to consult with a lawyer. The $500 you spend on a consultation fee may save you thousands of dollars in the end.

4. Next option is Ombudsperson BC. The chances of them conducting a review are very slim. Please email me if you would like more details or tips or how to get your case at least to an investigator. Ombudsperson will also not look at the decision, but looks at the process. They track every attempt at a complaint, so even it yours doesn’t make it to an investigator, your intake form alone is helping. Your arguments to them are going to need to be grounded in administrative fairness.

I have asked the Ombudsperson separate the TRB from the Ministry of Education in their annual data reports, so we can track how many people are filing complaints against the TRB, as they refused to disclose this information in a Freedom of Information request. They seemed receptive to the idea, so I’ll be watching their annual report coming out this to year to see if my request was accepted. If not, I’ll follow up.

5. Right now, if someone asked me what they could do with decision letters that they know are not right. I would tell them, to please consider filing with Ombudsperson and go through the process, even if the chances of success are slim. We need to let them know that we are not satisfied with the TRB and Ombudsperson determines what needs are out there, based on whether people are filing complaints or not. So, your voice on this does matter.

Please consider providing feedback to the Ministry of Education.

Also, please consider contacting me. There is a wider much larger project that I am working on, and I would love to hear other people’s stories.

6. Getting your complaint to a consent resolution is slim. Right now the most recent stats from the Commissioner’s office reveals that from April – June, only 7% made it to a consent resolution.

It sounds like a dead end. What’s the point? Here it is. When we file complaints they stay on the certificate holder’s record. If there is more than one complaint and they build, the chance of success increase. You are basically filing to help out the next parent or the next child. And, who knows…maybe this isn’t the first time that someone has filed a complaint and yours will actually be successful.

If we say nothing and don’t speak up, it helps no one. It’s like it never even happened. Don’t get your hopes up. Manage expectations, but file with the TRB, and then file with Ombudsperson. Oh and then call me and blab all about it. I’ll make your effort worth it. You’ll be part of a larger story. 😉

Advocacy Summer Camp

Hello Parents.

Welcome to advocacy summer camp. You have two months to get in advocacy shape for the upcoming school year in the fall. Well….technically you don’t have two months, advocacy is a life long learning journey, but it’s more of a reflection of the sense of urgency we all feel when our kids are struggling.

If you are new to advocacy and are wondering where in the world to start, here is your summer reading.

Let’s start here. With information. The more you know, the better you will be at advocating for your child.

Start with Your District Website

  1. What are their policies from the Board of Education?
    1. Each district will have a Board section with lots of policies around suspension, restraint/seclusion, anti-ableism, assessments, etc. Not every district will have the same type of policy.
  2. What are their documents around conflict resolution path?
    1. Most districts will have documents on HOW to resolve conflicts within your school. They have a path they want you to take based on hierarchy. Know that if your concern is serious, you can jump and skip steps.
  3. What is the appeals process?
    1. Everyone can submit an appeal to the Board of Education, and it should be outlined on your schools website. You can also find it referenced in the School Act. Section 11.
  4. What is your districts code of conduct?
    1. Read the district code of conduct. Also be aware of Section 177 under the School Act. There is no appeals process if this happens to you.

District websites can be a maze. A complete maze. Keep going.

Look at Provincial Manuals and Acts

  1. The School Act
  2. The Teacher’s Act
  3. FIPPA (Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act
  4. The Erase Website
  5. Special Needs Manual
    1. In this Manual (first page) there are links to the Special Needs Order, Individual Education Plan Order, Student Progress Report Order, Support Services for Schools Order
  6. Diversity in BC Schools Policy
  7. The Multiculturalism Act
  8. The Human Rights Code
  9. DPAC Parents manuals on advocacy and policy
    1. There are LOTS of information and manuals on this site.
  10. The complete list by the Ministry of Education, including homeschooling and online learning

Legal Cases in Education

  1. Link for education cases
  2. CanLii
    1. For instructions on how to research your own using CanLii scroll to bottom of the page.
  3. Education Law

What are my External Organization options?

  1. Professional Conduct Unit / Teacher’s Regulation Branch
    1. Here is my tip sheet on how to file a complaint
  2. Ombudsperson
    1. Here is my info sheet on more details
    2. Fair Schools Report
  3. Office of Information and Privacy Commissioner
    1. When you submit a Freedom of Information request with the school. If you feel you are missing information or they have redacted too much, you can submit a complaint and they will review it and investigate.
  4. Human Rights Tribunal
    1. Human Rights Clinic (lots of information, blogs, free education workshops, services)
    2. Here is my tip sheet.

Where Can I go for Advocacy Help?

  1. Inclusion BC
  2. Family Support Institute
  3. Dyslexia BC
  4. BCEdAccess to Education – Facebook group and website
  5. Independent Service Providers for advocacy support and counselling (email me and I’ll refer you)
  6. Legal Help
  7. Dial-A-Lawyer
  8. If you want a specific Education Lawyer – email me, I can refer you.

What about the Process of Advocacy?

  1. How to deal with silence
  2. Advocacy tips
  3. When going to the media, be careful of defamation.
  4. Most school districts have a retainer with Harris & Co . Be aware that their lawyers may be reviewing your emails way earlier than you think.
  5. **** I HIGHLY recommend you get support, and I REALLY encourage people to consider joining the BCEdAccess Facebook group with over 4,500 parents who have a vast knowledge of advocacy and insight and support. You are not alone. You don’t need to do this alone.

This page was last updated on July 21, 2022.

IF anyone has any more information of manuals that they feel belong on this list, please email me and I will update it.