Treat IPV as a Human Rights Issue in the Workplace

Today is Day 12 of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence. This post is part of my series, 16 tips in 16 days for getting your workplace domestic violence programme off the ground.

If you missed any part of the series, you can go back to Day 1 here.

In Canada, unlike in many U.S. states, the protected status of IPV survivorship remains a grey area. No human rights commission has officially commented, and we don’t yet have clear case law. But there are important reasons for employers to treat IPV as a human rights issue — beyond moral considerations.

The US context

In the US, 13 states have incorporated DV survivorship as a protected ground of discrimination (as of December 2023).

Separately, the EEOC has recognised a link between DV/IPV-related discrimination and the protected grounds of sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Examples include:

• terminating an employee because of fear of “drama battered women bring to the workplace”
• not selecting a male applicant after learning the applicant obtained a restraining order against a husband
• demoting an employee based on stereotypes about judgment and “personal problems”
• treating court leave for an assault differently than court leave for domestic violence

Canada: a legal grey area

In Canada, IPV survivorship is not a standalone protected ground in human rights legislation. There is no commission guidance and little case law.

However, in the past year, three human rights applications on IPV survivorship moved to the hearing stage for the first time in Canada. They were grounded in protected grounds such as sex, marital status, and disability.

• One was dismissed for being out of time.
• Another is before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
• Another is before the BC Human Rights Tribunal, where an interim decision acknowledged a potential link between domestic violence and the grounds of sex and marital status.

Intersection with disability

The physical and psychological impacts of IPV fall under the protected ground of disability. Workplace responses need to address intersecting rights together.

Research suggests that treating a substance use disorder without addressing IPV will often fail. A 2017 case illustrated how accommodating a substance use disorder while treating IPV-related absences as non-compliance can lead to job loss.

A workplace IPV programme needs trust

Approaching IPV as a human rights issue can help cultivate trust and reduce resistance to risk assessment and safety planning. Employees are more likely to engage when experiences are recognised holistically.

Ready to take action?

If you’re interested in learning more about creating a trauma- and violence-informed IPV program in your workplace — including risk assessments, safety planning, and policy development — I provide guidance, training, and advisory services for organisations across Canada (except Quebec and the territories).

Please reach out. I’d love to speak with you.