Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Canadian Christian Social Service Agency Barred From Enforcing Lifestyle Code

In Heintz v. Christian Horizons, 2008 HRTO 22 (April 15, 2008), the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal held that a non-profit group, Christian Horizons, is not entitled to an exemption from the sexual orientation non-discrimination provisions of the Ontario Human Rights Code. Section 24(1)(a) of the Code provides that the right to equal treatment in employment is not infringed when a "religious ... organization that is primarily engaged in serving the interests of persons identified by their ... creed... employs only ... persons similarly identified if the qualification is a reasonable and bona fide qualification because of the nature of the employment." Christian Horizons operates Christian residences for developmentally disabled children. It is the largest community living service provider in the province and receives $75 million per year in government funding.

Connie Heintz, a support worker at a Christian Horizons residential facility was told she would be terminated because she was not in compliance with the organization's Lifestyle and Morality Statement which, among other things, prohibits staff from engaging in homosexual relationships. The Tribunal held the Sec. 24(1)(a) exemption inapplicable because "the primary object and mission of Christian Horizons is to provide care and support for individuals who have developmental disabilities, without regard to their creed." Nor is the employment requirement a reasonable qualification because of the nature of Heintz's employment. The Tribunal went on to find that "Independent of whether Christian Horizons has met the conditions for the exemption under section 24(1)(a), [it] ... has infringed Ms. Heintz’s rights under the Code as a result of the work environment and how she was treated once her sexual orientation came to light."

The Tribunal in its lengthy opinion awarded Heintz damages of $23,000 plus lost wages and benefits. It also ordered Christian Horizons to cease imposing its Lifestyle and Morality Statement as a condition of employment and ordered it to adopt an anti-discrimination and an anti-harassment policy as well as a human rights training program for all its employees. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]