Christina Catenacci, BA, LLB, LLM, PhD
‘Tis the season for us to put away the lawn furniture and take apart the garden. The sunlight hours are decreasing and the plants around the house are turning brown. We are now faced with leaves on the ground, colder, damper weather, and soon, Christmas commercials. As we take out our winter coats and snow shovels, it is important to remember that this is the time that Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) can hit employees. What can employers do?
It is important for employers to be aware and recognize that Seasonal Affective Disorder can cause employees to experience these main symptoms, as noted here and here:
The causes have to do with factors such as amount of light, body temperature, genes and hormones.
Moreover, SAD is related to a person’s biological clock, which regulates the circadian rhythm. This “clock” responds to changes in season because of the differences in the length of the day, and tells the body to sleep as the days shorten. Since we usually live and work in conditions that don’t follow the seasons (e.g., 9-to-5 workdays), this response puts us out of step with our daily schedules.
Furthermore, research suggests that hormones and neurotransmitters, including serotonin and melatonin, chemical messengers in the brain that help regulate sleep, mood and appetite, may be disturbed in cases of SAD.
There is treatment, and the prognosis is good. Things that have been known to help the situation include:
Even without treatment, symptoms typically disappear in the spring.
Like major depressive disorder, SAD is a mental illness and might fall in the category of disability under human rights legislation. Employers are recommended to be supportive of employee who experience SAD, as they have a duty to accommodate such employees to the point of undue hardship.
Accommodation could involve providing increased flexibility in work hours or break times, or something more substantial such as a leave of absence or temporary job restructuring, retraining or assignment to an alternative position. It really depends on the circumstances.
More specifically, an employer could allow an employee suffering from SAD to take a longer daytime break than usual to walk around the block in the sunlight. Another solution might be to allow the employee to take more frequent eating breaks. Alternatively, the employee could be allowed to move to a workstation closer to a window. Another option could involve letting the employee work around an important cognitive-behavioural therapy or massage therapy appointment.
Many accommodations can be made easily, and at minimal cost. However, it is important for employers to explore the options with the employee in their efforts to meet their duty to accommodate.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission suggests the following when accommodating an employee on the ground of disability:
Disability is a complicated topic and it is important for employers to understand various illnesses they may confront in the workplace so they can fulfil their responsibilities under the applicable human rights legislation.
Christina Catenacci
First Reference Human Resources and Compliance Editor
Accommodating employees with disabilities to the point of undue hardship under human rights legislation can be a complicated task. It’s important to make sure the accommodation process goes smoothly and the employee can focus on working as efficiently as possible, but employers may not be sure about what kinds of questions to ask disabled employees in order to meet their needs.
Christina Catenacci, BA, LLB, LLM, PhD
The Canadian Human Rights Commission recently posted a policy on its website concerning how it interprets and applies section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) when it receives an inquiry or complaint. The purpose of section 13 of the Act is to balance Canadians’ rights to equality and freedom of expression with respect to hate messages, as protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The parliamentary record indicates that section 13 was initially included in the legislation to address activities of individuals and groups who used the telephone system to disseminate hate messages. In December 2001, parliament amended the CHRA by adding section 13(2), which makes it clear that Internet hate messages come under the jurisdiction of the commission.
Read the whole article on Slaw.ca.
Marie-Yosie Saint-Cyr, LL.B. Managing Editor
I’ve discussed workplace gossip here before, and what bosses can do to prevent it or at least reduce the potential harm, but there are a couple of hyper-modern developments that I didn’t get into: reality television and the Internet. These two things have created a culture of “sharing”, for lack of a better word, that encourages people at play or work to divulge the most mundane and private details of their lives to others—the kind of information that one previously might only have shared with family or best friends.
Adam Gorley