Category: Uncategorized

Posted on

Teachers Regulation Branch (TRB) Decision

Here is an important TRB decision about a teacher who was too rigid and the impacts of their rigidity impacting students differently. More so for Indigenous students and neurodivergent students.

“Polishak did not generally adjust his manner of teaching, classroom expectations or assignments to support students’ individual learning needs. A parent of student (“Student A”) asked for Student A to use headphones in class while working on assignments to assist with focus, which is a helpful strategy for students with ADHD. Polishak did not allow Student A to use headphones and did not allow it for some time after the School principal advised him to do so.”

ALSO:

“In the 2023-2024 school year, Polishak generally used rigid classroom rules, which he rarely modified to support the individual needs of all learners in his classes. These rules negatively impacted some students more than others. Over one-third of the students in the School were Indigenous and many of them bussed to and from the School. Polishak’s rules included:

a. Students were required to value all of the class time by not being late. When a student had a history of lateness, Polishak sometimes refused to let the student enter the classroom. Polishak required late students to wait in the hallway for up to 15 minutes, which resulted in students missing more learning time and sometimes falling behind on in-class assignments.

b. Polishak required students to complete all assignments. He did not usually modify or adjust assignments to meet a student’s individual needs. Polishak imposed a “homework detention” on students who had not completed assignments, by which the assignment had to be completed under his supervision before or after school, at lunch or during the flex block.”

There is more to this decision.

Here is the decision in full:

Jonathon Tyler Polishak

Posted on

Reasonable Accommodations for “General Education”

This is a new education case that was posted on June 16th, 2026. This is from Alberta. While it is not binding in BC because it is from a different province, cases from other provinces are still influential and are used by human rights tribunal decision makers to help them interpret and apply human rights law to the case they have in front of them.

JF obo DF v Calgary Board of Education, 2026 AHRC 68

There are some paragraphs in this case that succinctly outline the duty to accommodate. As always I recommend people read the case in full. Lots of details in there about the specific circumstances of the case.

Duty to Accommodate

[26]      The starting point for an analysis of accommodation is found in Central Okanagan School District No. 23 v Renaud,[8] where the Supreme Court of Canada described accommodation as a “multi-party” process:

The search for accommodation is a multi-party inquiry. Along with the employer and the union, there is also a duty on the complainant to assist in securing an appropriate accommodation…

To facilitate the search for an accommodation, the complainant must do his or her part as well. Concomitant with a search for reasonable accommodation is a duty to facilitate the search for such an accommodation. Thus in determining whether the duty of accommodation has been fulfilled the conduct of the complainant must be considered.

…

The other aspect of this duty is the obligation to accept reasonable accommodation… The complainant cannot expect a perfect solution.

[27]      The Alberta Court of Appeal stated in Callan v Suncor Inc.[9] that a complainant “is not entitled to dictate the accommodation he or she will accept” and that “[t]here is no duty of instant or perfect accommodation, only reasonable accommodation.”

[28]      As Chief Oviatt stated in RS obo CS v Edmonton School Division (RS)[10] in respect to the above decisions:

These decisions bear on the Complaint. The respondent had a duty to arrange the complainant’s learning environment in a way that he could meaningfully access general education. It also had a duty to reasonably accommodate his disabilities to the point of undue hardship. Undue hardship is a high threshold that places a significant obligation on the service provider. At the same time, all parties must participate and cooperate in the accommodation process. Ultimately, the respondent was best suited to determine how to reasonably accommodate the complainant in light of its operations, and the complainant’s parents had a duty to accept reasonable, not perfect, accommodation.

[30]      In RS, the parents raised complaints in respect to the provision of safe spaces, speech supports, and a one-on-one educational assistant, among other forms of requested accommodations; which are also issues raised in the Complaint. In RS, the Tribunal determined that:

The respondent was obliged to provide reasonable accommodation to the complainant to ensure he had access to general education, and it was entitled to inform its decision using all available information. The physician’s March 2022 medical recommendation was undoubtedly one piece of that information. So was the complainant’s behaviour at school and the respondent’s ability to meet the same objectives by using a classroom educational assistant who prioritized the complainant’s needs. The respondent was entitled to apply its expertise in education to determine a reasonable level of support.

[31]      Finally, in Moore, the Supreme Court of Canada emphasized that “a margin of deference is…owed to governments and administrators in implementing [education policy].”

[35]       There is no information in the records indicating the respondent has failed to provide the support indicated in the January 4, 2024, report to DF. Nor is there any information suggesting any available resources were withheld or that the respondent failed to reasonably accommodate DF considering its operations. Rather, the records include hundreds of pages of correspondence confirming accommodation steps being taken by the School, Student Support and Safety Plan documents from September and October 2024 setting out plans for how School staff will assist DF, and a Learning Plan from October 2024 derived from specialist recommendations.

[36]      In more general terms, it is not sufficient for a complainant to demonstrate that there is a program or treatment that would be beneficial that has not been provided by a school for the Tribunal to find that a respondent school board has violated the Act. This would run counter to the principle outlined in Moore that school boards should be provided some deference in how they meet their obligation to provide meaningful access to education.[13]

[37]      While it is clear from the materials that the complainant’s parents have been dissatisfied with the respondent’s accommodation efforts for some time, the record supports a robust, collaborative approach to accommodation that, although it could be argued was not perfect, reasonably accommodated the complainant to the point of undue hardship.  Prior to the Complaint being filed, and afterwards, hundreds of emails were exchanged between the parties, and many meetings held, to develop, implement, and adapt accommodation plans for DF.

[38]      Therefore, I find the Complaint has no reasonable prospect of success under section 4 of the Act.

*******

This complaint did not proceed to a hearing, and it was dismissed.

One of thing that I know is going to stick out to people reading this is “the respondent was best suited to determine how to reasonably accommodate the complainant in light of its operations, “

One thing to keep in mind is that resources must be distributed equitably. Whatever funding the government gets, and how they decide to organize their operations, are they doing so in an equitable manner?

Parents take Ministry to Court – Win for Equitable Education

[152]      The Charter guarantees equal access to education for all students; the corollary effect is that that the equitable principle must be applied in times of labour or resource shortages.  Here, what is apparent is that there was no consideration of how the reduced resources could be redistributed among all students.  It was assumed that minimal disruption to the system would result by targeting only a sub-set of students – those who use an EA. However, this approach failed to consider that non-disabled students might suffer the least amount of harm since they do not have the same disadvantages as the students with disabilities and could adapt to an at-home learning program more easily, i.e., some non-disabled students switch to at-home learning to free up more resources for complex-needs students, or some of them, to attend school in-person even with the EAs presently unavailable.

There is a zone.

Not getting access, barriersGetting Access “Reasonable Accommodation”Ideal Accommodation
Discrimination, cannot be justified.Having “a ramp” – barrier is removed, it doesn’t promise a certain level of demonstrated ability via grades, just access. An opportunity. Dismissed complaint if parents are expecting ideal and refuse to accept a reasonable accommodation.


X by Y v. Board of Education of School District No. Z, 2024 BCHRT 72

[110] …. Not all negative experiences are discrimination. Even accepting that these incidents occurred, I did not hear evidence that could establish, on a balance of probabilities, that X’s disability was a factor in the conduct of the adults involved in these interactions.

[120] …..by reviewing the Diagnosis Report, developing an IEP, making various support people and strategies available that were incorporated into the classroom and outside, reviewing progress and changes, and adapting its approach in response……

Even if they can argue that their decisions aren’t discriminatory, you can still appeal a decision under Section 11 if you don’t agree with it and you think it is harming your child.

Not a single person has wide-sweeping rights under the Human Rights Code or the Charter. It is how your rights are defined, and that is defined in common law. Created by tribunal decisions and courts.

The duty to accommodate is our strongest form of advocacy, but there is a ceiling. It’s not unlimited. It can bring your child up to reasonable accommodations and barriers removed. It may not be the educational experience you wish for them. It doesn’t mean that your kids won’t experience negative experiences or that it won’t be hard. It doesn’t mean they wont experience harm from the education system as a whole.

We need to advocate through multiple pathways, have multiple teams of people in various roles and positions, all advocating for systemic changes. Laws need to be applied. It takes people and organizations to do that. Our education isn’t operating to the fullest it can in implementing human rights for children with disabilities. But it will only bring us up to “reasonable”. If we want our ideal, we need other forms of advocacy and relationship building to bring us the rest of the way.

Here are systemic blogs you may find interesting.


Advocating for Systemic Change
Complaints are the Ultimate Protest
Systemic Imperfection
Who does Society care about?
Why Can’t we Just Sue the Government?
Systemic Impacts of Scarcity in Education


Posted on

Dear Parent/Caregiver,

Here is what I would like to tell every new parent of a disabled/neurodivergent child entering the school system. I learned this the hard way. Hoping to pave a path so it’s easier for those who follow.

*******

You are going to be entering the school system and advocacy will be required.

How the school system responds to you, as a whole, is not personal. They are not peering into your soul and basing their response on what they see. Even if they really like you, it wont change their response. They will protect themselves no matter what, first.

School districts speak a different language. The language of liability. The language of ableism, racism, and patriarchy. They are assessing you based on risk. How risky of disruption or expensive are you going to be?

There is nothing wrong with you. You haven’t done anything wrong. This is not your fault.

The lens through which they evaluate and come to a conclusion about your child is not your shame to carry. It is theirs.

You are dealing with a colonial system. This is a machine that has been operating for a very long time. The machine thinks it is successful and wants to keep going.

When people gaslight you, try to control you, ignore you, and/or silence you, this is an example of the colonial machine. The machine has different priorities. Stability, predictability, risk-management, union contracts, power and control, etc. If the system were a person, we would describe them as narcissistic using coercive control.

If you are someone who has experienced abuse and trauma, this will be especially triggering.

However you cope with this, it is not your shame to carry.

However you learn to navigate K-12 education, please don’t internalize their behaviour towards you as a reflection of your own value.

How they behave is a reflection of the machine, and it has nothing to do with you.

How the machine grinds and turns the wheels is not a reflection of all who personally works within it. There are fabulous caring people in education. Some people help grease the wheel more than others. Some are completely oblivious to it. Others just think, this is how things work and defend the system. If you are in the school system long enough, you will meet wolves in sheep clothing. Intentional or not.

Being able to identify what is a reflection of the machine, can save your mental health and protect your emotional capacity when you advocate.

This is a chess game. There are rules. Learn to play the chess game and it will help you advance. Get the most of what you can for your child and their education while staying afloat.

There is hope.

You will know when you are not getting what your child is entitled to, where to focus your energy, or when it is time to leave. Knowledge is power.

You belong to a community, whether you have found us yet or not. Your people are out there. There are more people advocating for your child than you may realize. Movement has been occurring. The machine doesn’t want you to recognize those. So, we remind ourselves.

“The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.” – Alice Walker

******

More blogs on the school system:

Liability in Education
School Emergencies
Understanding Systemic Change

Posted on

What is Reasonable? – Duty to Accommodate

A lot of human rights decisions from tribunals will focus on whether the school’s response and decision making was reasonable. Where the accommodations reasonable? Was the delay reasonable? Did they try and mitigate the harm? Was that reasonable?

Given what they knew at the time about the child’s disability-related needs, did they make a reasonable decision? It doesn’t need to be the perfect decision, just reasonable. Can they justify it?

When it comes to decision making, in order for it to be administratively fair, they need to explain to you the decision. According to Ombudsperson, you have the right to receive a decision, “Fairness is also about providing clear and meaningful reasons for decisions so the person affected can understand what process your organization followed and how it came to the decision it did.”

If schools are justifying their accommodations as reasonable, it is only fair that they explain why they justify those accommodations. There justification has to meet a specific standard. (See below)

Tribunal decisions have already clearly stated that we don’t get to pick what accommodations are provided to our child, we are on a consultation basis.

Leaving a student to suffer disability-related impacts without accommodations, was not seen as reasonable when they were aware. They couldn’t justify it. If they can’t justify it based on fact and evidence, they are in trouble. It can be discrimination.

Let’s look at some cases and see what they say. I will discuss more below once you read through the cases I have selected with key take aways at the end of the blog. Knowing and understanding this, how can we tailor our advocacy? We can use this to make it work for us, and push them on this. Push them to make their decisions make sense. Justify it as reasonable. They can’t do that? Then we can push the line and move it.

CASE ONE

An example of what is unreasonable:

Student (by Parent) v. School District, 2023 BCHRT 237

[100]      In short, I agree with the District that the Parent and Student were obliged to bring forward information relating to accommodation. The Parent did that, when she communicated that the Student had anxiety and trichotillomania and that school was taking a significant toll on her physical and mental health. That information should have been enough to prompt a meaningful inquiry by the school to identify what was triggering the Student’s symptoms and what supports or accommodations may be appropriate to ensure she was able to meaningfully and equitably access her education. The failure to take that step was, in my view, not reasonable. As a result, the disability-related impacts on the Student, arising from conditions in her Language 10 class between April 24 and June 27, 2019, have not been justified and violate s. 8 of the Human Rights Code.

(Summary: school knew she was struggling, knew she had a disability, and that her struggling was connected to school. They didn’t do anything about figuring out if she needed any accommodations. Not a reasonable response.)

*********

CASE TWO

X by Y v. Board of Education of School District No. Z, 2024 BCHRT 72

[112] Accommodation requires a reasonable, not a perfect solution: Central Okanagan School District No. 23 v. Renaud, [1992] 2 SCR 970 [Renaud]. While there may have been other approaches available to the District, this does not necessarily render the one taken unreasonable. What is reasonable and what constitutes undue hardship is fact specific and will turn on the specific circumstances of a particular case: Renaud.

(Summary: You don’t get your perfect or ideal accommodation, only an accommodation that achieves the goal of equity. It will be very case-by-case what that looks like. Not the same for every person.)

********

CASE THREE

Kahn v. Upper Grand District School Board, 2019 HRTO 1137 (CanLII)

[260]           In rejecting the Loop of School plan, Ms. Kahn failed in her obligation to co-operate in the accommodation process. In so finding, I note that parents do not have the right to dictate the accommodations which their children will be provided with to access education. While parents do have the right to provide input as part of the accommodation process – which Ms. Kahn did in this case – they must accept reasonable accommodations offered by the school board. See UM v. York Region District School Board, 2017 HRTO 1718; Fisher.

(Summary: School educators determine what the accommodations should be. If you don’t help to facilitate this and give them a chance to see if it works, you wont be able to complain later. You complaint could be dismissed.)

********

CASE FOUR

Wells v. Manitoba (Human Rights Commission) et al., 2025 MBKB 86

[1]         Maxine Wells (Ms. Wells or the applicant) is a tireless advocate for her son who had learning disability challenges as a student in the Border Land School Division (the Division).  Ms. Wells was in regular contact with his teachers, school administration and Division personnel[1] regarding his learning challenges and how they should be addressed.  Often, there were disagreements about his needs and how they should be addressed.  Several times, Ms. Wells retained independent specialists to assess her son’s learning disabilities and provide recommendations on how to accommodate those learning disabilities in the school setting.  Ms. Wells says that the Division was often dismissive of the recommendations of these specialists.  This became increasingly frustrating for her as she wanted to ensure her son had the best possible outcome in an education framework that did not, from her perspective, appear to be giving him the opportunity to succeed.  She says that ultimately, her son did not achieve the level of learning he could have had the Division followed the recommendations of the specialists as she urged them to do.

This case had the court assess their reasonableness in their response and they outlined the reasonableness test.

THE STANDARD OF REVIEW

[10]      The standard of review to be applied when the merits of an administrative decision are challenged is reasonableness (Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653, at para. 16).  None of the parties suggested that the Legislature intended a different standard or that the rule of law requires the standard of correctness be applied.  (Vavilov at para. 17)

[11]      In conducting a reasonableness review, a court must consider the outcome of the administrative decision in light of its underlying rationale in order to ensure that the decision as a whole is transparent, intelligible and justified.  What distinguishes a reasonableness review from a correctness review is that the court conducting a reasonableness review must focus on the decision the administrative decision-maker actually made, including the justification offered for it, and not on the conclusion the court itself would have reached in the administrative decision-maker’s place.  (Vavilov at para. 15; see also para. 83)

[12]      Other principles which guide a reasonableness review are:

•         A decision is unreasonable if there is a failure of rationality internal to the reviewing process or where the decision is untenable in light of the relevant factual and legal constraints (Vavilov at para 101);

•         A decision must be based on reasoning that is both rational and logical (Vavilov at para. 102);

•         A reasonable decision is one that is justified in light of the facts; the reasonableness of a decision may be jeopardized where the decision-maker has fundamentally misconstrued or failed to account for evidence before it (Vavilov at para. 126);

•         A decision-maker’s reasons must meaningfully account for the central issue and concerns raised by the parties.  Where a decision-maker fails to meaningfully grapple with key issues or central arguments raised by the parties, that may result in the decision being unreasonable (Vavilov at paras. 127-128).

[30]      In my view, the Report is a fulsome consideration of how the Division considered and accommodated the learning disabilities of Ms. Wells’ son.  It is “transparent, intelligent and justified”.  The Investigator understood Ms. Wells’ concerns and considered the evidence with those concerns in mind.  She acknowledged the differences between Ms. Wells and the Division with respect to the son’s learning challenges and reasonably concluded that the Division would be in the best position to determine how to accommodate those challenges, taking into account the available assessments.

[31]      I agree that there was ample evidence of extensive and reasonable efforts by the Division to accommodate the son’s needs, notwithstanding that the applicant did not agree with them.  Dissatisfaction with the decisions of the Division do not amount to discrimination.

[32]      In my opinion, the Report and the decision to dismiss the Complaint is transparent, intelligent and justified.

[33]      The application is dismissed, with costs.

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

Professionals have a zone of reasonableness. Their decisions don’t need to be perfect, but there is a standard for reasonableness.

Even with the Teacher’s Regulation Branch, their behaviour has to be a “marked departure” from the Teachers Standards. It has to be unreasonable based on their professional expectations.

So let’s review.

If you feel the accommodations are not reasonable and your child is still not equitably accessing their education…remember they need to remove barriers…. then the school needs to justify their decision making to you in order for it to be possible that it is reasonable and administratively fair.

Their explanation needs to be:

  • Transparent
  • Intelligiable
  • Based on fact and evidence
  • Rational and logical
  • Connect to the key concerns

What can you do?

  • Explain the harm you are witnessing. You are the one best to discuss your child and their needs. They get the final decision, but they are required to meaningful consult with you.
    .
  • You will need to communicate need to them (in an email) so they don’t claim hindsight later on. You don’t want them to try and claim they made a reasonable decision at the time based on what they knew.
    .
  • You want to trigger meaningful inquiry by expressing the harm you are witnessing and linking it to school.
    .

MEANINGFUL INQUIRY – MEANINGFUL CONSULTATION – DOCUMENT DOCUMENT DOCUMENT



The duty to accommodate requires collaboration. Both parties have responsibilities in the process. Advocating for your child is part of the process. If you refuse to collaborate they can claim that you “frustrated” the collaboration process and they made a reasonable decision based on the information they knew at the time. They still have a requirement to accommodate your child whether you are involved in advocacy or not.(1) If you don’t want to be consulted you don’t need to be. They will just make their “reasonable” decision with the information they had at the time, minus any input from you.

*** The duty to accommodate is a process grounded in legally protected rights. This is not a perfect system. It is the most powerful form of advocacy we have, as it forces the schools to do things and explain things that no other system can. Parents experience more success advocating for their kids using a human rights lens. Even with Ombudsperson, it’s a recommendation, not an enforcement.

Push them to justify their behaviour, their decisions through the lens of reasonableness. When they can’t do that, you know you have room to push for further supports. Always come back to the discrimination test. Can you prove harm? Yes? Then keep going.

Keep in mind, you can appeal a decision or an absent of a decision to the School Board called a Section 11 appeal.

I don’t want to tone police, you do you, but when you ask them to justify their decision making, I wouldn’t suggest you use those words. Seeking clarification….. or can you please explain ___ to me so I understand better…
No one is going to fault you for wanting to understand someone’s decision making related to your child’s accommodations.

Having them justify their decision making,
or NOT being able to justify it
can be very helpful with your advocacy and evidence collecting.

Good luck advocates!

Here are some further blogs that expand on concepts I discussed above.

1. Hindsight

2. Duty to accomodate

3. Meaningful Inquiry

4. Meaningful consultation & A Guide to Meaningful Consultation

5. Section 11 appeal

(1) – They have the duty to accommodate your child whether you are involved or not.

L.B. v. Toronto District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1622 (CanLII)


(c)      School boards have an obligation under the Education Act to provide appropriate special education placements, programs and services to their exceptional students. Parental conduct or lack of parental authority cannot be used as a justification for not meeting an exceptional student’s needs; and

(d)      I agree with the decision in R.B. v. Keewatin-Patricia District School Board, (R.B./Keewatin) 2013 HRTO 1436, an HRTO decision cited by both parties in this case, at para 265, that a parent’s “fierce advocacy” for his or her child must not and cannot prevent a school board from accommodating the child’s needs to the point of undue hardship.

Posted on

This is an Emergency!! Serious School Incidents

Not all education issues are sudden, turn into a panic, flip your life upside down or it’s an emergency that needs to get resolved right now. Some issues are slow and build over time.

This blog is about emergencies. The sudden ones.

If shit hits the fan fast, this is the go-to page.

Some people find my site and contact me because other people are telling them, “You have got to talk to Kim!!” So, if there is a page you want to pass along to another parent in need, here it is.

Emergencies are different territories.

What is the district thinking?

If this is an emergency situation after an incident, you will not be the only one realizing that this is a big deal and it could snowball into something so much worse. Trust me. The district knows too. They are NOT going to want to show it on their face or in their emails that they are aware of how bad this is. At least not until they meet with you. They are going to be curious and wonder:

  • How do you feel?
  • How mad are you?
  • Are you going to be controllable or are you flying off the charts?
  • Do you know your rights?
  • Will you even mention a legal process?
  • Are you going to threaten the media?
  • Will you call the police?
  • Will you be consulting with a lawyer?
  • They will be assessing you – do we think this person has the resources/capacity to make this painful for us?
    .

They want to get into your head.

Why?

BECAUSE YOUR REACTION WILL TELL THEM EVERYTHING THAT THEY NEED TO DO.

Their goal is to…

  1. Keep you satisfied enough, but not give or do too much.
  2. Keep this internal and as quiet as possible. They want to be able to control it.
  3. Have as little impact on staff as possible. (They have unions to deal with)
  4. Not have any formal complaints be filed. (They want to know how expensive this will get)
  5. If this ends in a settlement, it is very normal to have a settlement agreement include a release and a non-disclosure agreement. (You don’t necessarily have to sign the NDA part.)
    .

Their liability processes have kicked into place. They have notified the School Protection Plan and they are waiting to see if you make a big deal out of this, and if you do, what are you going to do? To read more about how schools operate from a liability framework, read my Liability in Schools page.

They may be straight with you and ask you not to go to the media or file a complaint. They will reassure you that this will be taken care of, and your child will be supported.

They may offer you an external investigation and tell you that this will be investigated. (Their investigation will not be to find the truth and provide you with this information, it will be to reduce their liability.)

You may hear that staff are on a leave.

You will notice that your child is not on their list. They show up buried in #1. Keeping you satisfied. It absolutely kills parents to realize that schools actually aren’t focused on the best interest of your child in these situations; they are focused on themselves. You can use this to get what your child needs.

So, you may find yourself in this horrible situation. You can’t even process what has occurred. You may be at a hospital. You may have MFCD calling you. You could have the police contact you. Your child is traumatized and refusing to go back to school, and you are still in shock trying to process it all. The severity of all of this will differ. The end result is still the same. Trust has been broken and your child is refusing to go back, and you aren’t sure if you can even send them back after this. You have no idea how you are going to manage work when everything has just exploded.

So, what is your action plan in all of this?

I will break this down into themes and then put all of this into a timeline of steps at the end.

Media

I know you are ragging mad right now, but I do encourage you to give yourself 48 hours before calling the media. Some parents have had success in reversing field trip decisions or exposing exclusion. In terms of stories from a “grab the publics attention” kind of stories, those are small potatoes. This emergency situation is so bad, it’s in a different category. A few things to know about the media from experience.

  1. You never know what will take off. If your emergency is shocking, it could spread across the country very fast. You don’t know what will trigger people and all of a sudden you and your child are national news. Think 10 years ahead, will your child want this story in the news about them? (A human rights decision win involving a high school student showed up in over 60 media outlets across Canada and went international)
  2. You never will know exactly what will be written and what parts of your interview the journalist will pull out of your conversation. It will be a surprise, and I always find it very interesting to find out what parts have been selected and what has been left out. You won’t have control over the narrative.
  3. You cannot undo what is written in the media. Once its out there, it can take on a life of its own and you won’t have any control over it. Social media is wild. Years from now, when your child is an adult, they may Google the article and read all the comments, which some are going to be horrific.
    .

You may want to keep this in your back pocket and just know this is a possibility. But please, don’t make this decision when you’re mad. This could be used as leverage. You may feel that society needs to know about this. Finding the right reporter will be important. Please see my IN THE MEDIA page for reporter suggestions. You can also see what kinds of issues parents have taken to the media before. A lot of parents also feel that their issues are newsworthy, only to find out that reporters don’t want to touch the subject. Just because you feel that you can take it the media doesn’t mean the media will want to take it from you. Some subjects they won’t want to touch with a ten-foot pole, and sometimes the current news is just so horrific that it’s bad timing and they don’t think it’s enough of a story. I am aware of a couple of families who were shocked to find out that reporters didn’t want to publish their story.

External Investigator

The Superintendent may tell you they are going to have an External Investigator come and they will investigate everything and look into everything. These external investigators are mostly previous senior district administrators. A lot of them are retired Superintendents etc. A lot of people know each other from previous work and organizations. Some people have found them to be very biased.

Let me be clear.

This investigation is fully for them, and has nothing to do with you. This is for liability reasons. They can also use this as a way to get rid of staff they don’t want. If staff are a liability to them, they have launched into “constructive dismissal” techniques to drive them out or used investigation results to fire them. This is also something they can tell the Board of Education and/or the Ministry of Education that makes them look like they are taking care of things.

Doesn’t mean the investigation will be bad for you and not beneficial, but they are NOT going to investigate and then invite you into a meeting and tell you EVERYTHING that has occurred.

Here are some things you will hear.

  1. They will not be able to tell you anything about the staff, and they will state the reason is for privacy reasons. They won’t tell you what information they found out. They may tell you the staff are on a leave, but beyond that, the information will be VERY little.
  2. They will use this as a way to soothe you. This is the pacifier they will use in hopes you calm down.
  3. They will offer you an interview. (They want to know ALLLL the details, and everything you know and feel. They don’t want any surprises.) This isn’t necessarily bad. Just know that everything you are telling the investigator, you might as well be sitting in front of the Superintendent and their lawyers. But, the good thing about telling them what your child is experiencing is that they can’t claim HINDSIGHT. If they know your child is struggling, they have the responsibility to figure out how to remove the barriers. Meaningful Inquiry.
  4. This process also buys them time and delays the end result. They will tell you they can’t do anything until the investigation is over. The delay they hope will give you time to calm down and you will not be in fight mode. It also gives them time to think and have conversations with people about what on earth they are going to do. They are hoping you will expect less as time goes on.
    .

Something you may want to ask:

  1. When you are done with the investigation, will you consider if new administrator procedures or policy needs to develop to prevent this from happening to someone else?
  2. Will there be training for staff?
  3. Will you be reporting staff to the TRB?
  4. Will you be putting a Letter of Direction in the school employees’ file?
    .

Demand Letter or Filing Complaints

Now this is something you may want to think about.

In addition to the demand letter option, you can always look into filing a lot of complaints, depending on what has happened. To review your options, please see my Overview of the Complaint System. They don’t want you filing complaints. So you can use it.

Think about what you want for your kid. What barriers will they need to get back into school?

  • A new school?
  • A different teacher? Different EA?
  • Moved to a different classroom?
  • More EA supports/accommodations?
  • A plan for bully prevention – a safety person? To keep their cell phone on them?
  • A reintegration plan?
  • Counselling?
    .

NOW IS YOUR TIME TO ADVOCATE!!

They need to make things right by your child. They will never be able to undo what happened. They can’t just wave their arms around and the shock and trauma is gone. However, they should absolutely not be putting up any barriers to get your child back into school. The statement, “we don’t do that here” should not be coming out of their mouth.

They need to do everything in their power to remove the barriers, or deal with formal complaints.

You can use the complaints as a motivating factor. You may not want to file right away, as if they don’t remove the barriers you will have more to write in your complaint. You have one year to file a human rights complaint. There isn’t a time limit from the Teacher’s Regulation Branch (TRB). You can file a TRB complaint on teachers, Principals, and even the Superintendent. You may want to see how things unfold in the next few months before you file you anything.

You could send a demand letter, outlining everything you want. With a settlement amount. Just know, that you will be signing a release to not file any future complaints and they will want you to sign some version of a non-disclosure agreement/confidentiality agreement. For them this will close and end the issue.

The demand letter could be the fastest route to get you what you want. You may need settlement money to get your child counselling or other professional supports ASAP. You may want specific commitments and promises from the district in a written contract. Human rights complaints, even with fast-tracking, can take a couple of months to get into a mediation meeting.

Demand letters are an option. I know several parents who have been successful. Both public and independent schools. You can have a lawyer send a demand letter, or you can send one yourself.

*** Keep in mind no matter what the incident, it will need to be connected to a protected ground for the human rights complaint.

Contacting a Lawyer

I know meeting with a lawyer sounds like a big deal. It is. I will NEVER forget the moment I walked into a lawyer’s office for a consultation. The office looked like something out of a movie. I was offered 5 different types of water. I didn’t even know 5 types of water existed. Geez, as long as it doesn’t come from the toilet, I am good! There is just something about meeting with a lawyer and talking about your kids’ school that just makes you want to sob and wonder WTF is going on here. What planet am I on???

The money you spend on a lawyer could be sooo worth it in the long run. You are getting legal advice. There aren’t any missing blind spots. They can write up your demand letter or human rights complaint for you. They may think of things or be aware of things that you haven’t even thought about.

They can do the labour that parents find keeps them afloat. You can focus on your kid and the lawyer can deal with the school.

I have a lawyer on the list that I refer out to. I have never met this person. I have never talked to this person in any form of communication. There are no benefits coming to me at all when I make this referral. I have heard such positive feedback from parents that this is the law firm I pass along to everyone who wants a specialized education lawyer referral. There aren’t many who specialize in this field, and he is one of them. Here it is:


Vancouver Law Firm | Kesari Law Corporation

For a list of free legal consultation services, here is my list. Some parents have found pro bono lawyers who are willing to help.

Contacting the Ministry of Education

For public schools – the Ministry typically doesn’t respond to individual issues, but when you have issues that involve a group of children, then they respond. Action happens. They just won’t tell you about it. If nothing else, you leave a paper trail and documentation.

For independent schools – they have an independent investigator at the Ministry of Education. If your emergency reveals issues at the school that harm other kids as well, you may be able to trigger an investigation. If nothing else, you leave a paper trail and documentation.

I encourage people to tell the Ministry and you can notify the Superintendent that you are doing that. They aren’t going to like it. So, you can use that in your favor as well, if you like. Sometimes school districts need a little nudge. Or it can bring you some peace knowing that other people are aware.

Appealing a Decision

Both public and independent schools have appeal processes.

For public schools its called Section 11 under the School Act.

For independent schools, they will have their own process you will need to ask about. However persuasive they may be that they don’t have one, they need to have one, they should have one. The Ministry of Education will tell you to go that route.

Contacting the Board of Education

Each Trustee is responsible for a zone in your district. They are elected as a method of accountability and oversight for the district. Contacting them and letting them know what is going on is something you may want to consider. It will make the district administration sit up straighter when they know the Board is aware.

*******

ok, so we have now arrived at the timeline.

An emergency happens. Everything explodes. Now what?

Steps to Take

*** Advocacy in emergency situations can be similar to slow-burn situations because we still need to be focusing on our child’s disability-related needs and removing barriers. Children have a right to feel physically and psychologically safe at school. Duty to accommodate still applies.

The first step is going to feel awful, but it is an absolute must to consider.

  1. First and foremost, take care of your kid. (This isn’t the awful part.) Their needs are the priority right now. Have the conversations with the hospital staff, police, MFCD, or anyone else that you need to be having. AND HERE IS THE YUCKY PART. While you are doing this, think documentation. You are going to need evidence that your child felt as horrible as they did. You will want to take pictures of their injuries at their worst. Not day 5 of healing. You may want to take videos of what is transpiring. It may feel like you shouldn’t have your detective hat on while you are trying to take care of your kid, then give the task to someone else who is with you. The more evidence you have, documentation for ALLLL of the processes and interactions with the school, the stronger of a position you will be in to advocate for your kid, for barriers to be removed, and for a possible settlement for them. If you show up to the school and your 7-year-old is in handcuffs. You need to record them screaming.
  2. Reach out for help. Consider contacting a lawyer and ask for an urgent consultation. You need someone, a support person, to just process your own emotions and be able to think about what you need to be doing. Getting a counsellor may be very helpful, AND you will be documenting your own harm, as you may also want to file a human rights complaint on your own behalf. #3 is also at the same time as #2.
  3. Go to the top, immediately. Typically, there is a chain of command you have to climb in order to get to the next person. In these emergency situations. Screw it. Send an email to the Superintendent and Secretary-Treasurer, and ask for communication/meeting as soon as possible. You can cc: the Director of Learning, the District Learning Support person, your child’s principal. Whomever you want. Give them a timeline of 2 days to respond. 24 hours if you want to in some cases. If you don’t get a response, go to the School Board, and the Ministry. The Superintendent will want to speak to the staff with the most direct knowledge of what happened first, before they speak to you. Let them know that this is extremely urgent and time-sensitive. There is a chance that they have already heard about the incident, and they are expecting an email.
  4. When you meet with them, they will be thinking about all the points I mentioned above. How mad are you? Do you know your rights? They will then need to go back and discuss and get back to you. They will be reassuring you that they will take care of this and ask that you don’t do anything yet until you meet again. They will want to keep this internal, controllable and as quiet as possible. You want them to know that what happened is serious and you are not a doormat, without necessarily saying that. You need them to do what they can to support your child. But you don’t want to come off as uncontrollable or unhinged. You still need them. Collaborating with them in the best interest of your child will help you all move on as soon as possible. But if you don’t make a fuss or ask for things, they aren’t going to offer it.
  5. Over the next chunk of time, email them back and express requests as your child needs them as they transition back into school. Be as persistent and consistent as you need to be to get your kids needs met. You have your power of the possibility of formal complaints; they have their own power as they control your child’s education. As much as your instincts are telling you to gut them like a fish, you are so mad, if there is a win-win here for everyone, I would suggest you try to find it. Get your kid what they need and move on in your life. If you are going to sign a settlement, make sure you are happy with it, because once it’s signed, it’s a done deal. There are no do-overs. If they aren’t giving your kid what they need, you have complaint options that will force them to deal with this. (unless you have already signed a release) Some administrators don’t have a lot of experience in this, and they have no idea the lengths a parent will go to for their child, and so many people are propelled forward wanting to make sure there are safeguards in place for other children to not experience something like this either. Sometimes things are just so bad, that parents feel compelled to file complaints and make this public; otherwise, it feels like we are complicit. This is a personal decision and completely dependent on your family and the context of the situation. Do what you need to do for your own peace, either way.
  6. You will want to be fully aware of gathering documentation. My blogs on documentation are here on my blog list.
  7. Also, be aware that depending on what happens, you may be able to file a human rights complaint under Family Status for you as well. For more info on this, here is my Family Status page.
    .

Your Employment

Depending on the level and context of the emergency, some people have been able to take sick days, or some people have taken a leave of absence. When your child refuses to go back to school, all of a sudden, you are left scrambling.

Your employer has the duty to accommodate you too, under Family Status. You need to officially request accommodations from your work. Just don’t quit. If you have concerns about your employment, it may be worth it for you to consult a lawyer. (See referral above).

Sustain your Advocacy

This isn’t going to be easy, and it will probably push you past your comfort zone and up to the limits of your capacity.

In amongst all of the chaos, if you don’t think of yourself and your own needs, you will not be doing anyone, including your child, any favours.

You will need your own support. Ask for help.

Here is my school advocacy help directory list.

Finally, I wish you all the best. I’d love to say that school emergencies are rare and far and few between. I have had enough parents contact me over this topic, both public and independent, that I realized there was a need for this page. If you are someone who is aware of another parent in need, please do share.

Posted on

Getting Documents!

Alright, we have seen how the Ministry can “inadvertently” not disclose documents. (wink wink). Yeah right!

Lawyers not disclosing documents and withholding evidence they shouldn’t be, isn’t a new issue AT ALL! They can pull some sneaky shit. This is one area they like to take advantage of, and sometimes it takes a legal process to pry out the evidence. People who engage in litigation for their employment, deal with this issue more than they should. It’s bad, and I don’t want to normalize it. I am just not shocked at all that they had disclosure issues.

Improper conduct complaints have been filed at the BC Human Rights Tribunal (BC HRT) around this issue and I have read decisions when respondents have had to pay costs ($$$) if it discovered during the process of a hearing that documents were not disclosed.

Parents can file a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for documents to their school district requesting information about their child and personal information about themselves as well. If you want an example of how to write this, and have some added information about this process that is good to know, I have a Freedom of Information page. If you look on your district’s website they should have information about it. Know that they will view this as an adversarial move. Just be aware. They don’t like them.

I can tell you right now, you are NOT going to get all the evidence you want through your FOI request alone. It is going to take some time and detective work.

Because schools have risk-management and liability as the captain of their ship for decision making, they are NOT going to just roll over and give you all the evidence you need to be successful against them in a legal process.

You still may get some pretty interesting things in your FOI response package. I have. Some of it has been VERY interesting. They accidently sent copies of emails they sent to their lawyers during one FOI request. Another FOI request gave me an email from the external investigator trying to soothe the staff, saying she had experience with difficult parents. That gave me a good chuckle. Never thought I would be labelled a difficult parent for not wanting innocent children to be hurt. But the GOLD NUGGET evidence I had to get was through the Application process during my human rights complaint.

Let me tell you all about this little adventure.

I submitted an FOI request. What I got back was a lot of documents. They printed them off and shipped them to my house. Around 500 pages. Interesting. Other packages came digitally, so I don’t know why I got paper copies of this one. Other parents have received paper packages sent to their house as well.

I was chunking up the topics and going through everything. Then I put everything back into order. It was then that I realized pages were missing. It would go from 168 and the next page would be 172. ummm. hello. what?

Then there was this one document in particular, a very important email that I was never provided, that was sent to the staff in the school about my child. It was not in the FOI package. BUT. I had an email from the staff member who told me they would be sending this email out, so I knew it had to exist.

When you file an Office of Information Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) complaint, you have to go back to the school district and say, hey, I notice that __________ is missing. Can you recheck your files please and send it to me. When they don’t. Then you can file a complaint. Which I did. By the way, you can file a compliant too if you find the redactions questionable. AND they do push on that. So if they think they can hide stuff and get away with it, they absolutely will. You need be a detective. You need to read everything and look and see if people are talking about meetings, or communicating with people, or sending emails about things that you don’t have notes or copies of. (Also note, the school district will take all the extensions they are allowed to take. They will respond to you late, and make you come to them in hopes you lose it. To exhaust you.)

Now, a complaint with OIPC about missing documents mean you are filing due to an “inadequate search”. Basically, OIPC says, school district can you look more, and the school says, okay fine we did and we couldn’t find it. Then OIPC will come back to you say, they looked and couldn’t find it. OIPC is satisfied. File closed. …..eek…okay then…..

OIPC doesn’t have much teeth with this topic. But I still recommend parents file an OIPC complaint. More work for the district and it forces them to lie to the OIPC. If you ever find out that they weren’t honest, you can go back to the OIPC and re-open the file. If OIPC concludes they were up to no good, you could take that and give it to the Board of Education. Say, hey, your school district is not ethical.

So my file was closed. I did not give up.

I waited….

We reached document disclosure time. The respondents did not provide the email in their disclosure package. I asked them for it. They said they didn’t have it. I told them I was filing an application anyways, which I did. Years of being told they didn’t have it. I never believed them. The form to file an application for documents is Form 7.1 GA 9- tick off the box to order the other party to disclose documents.

Sent in the application and lo and behold. Guess what. (insert eye roll). Along comes the email saying that they found it in someone’s email inbox. BULLSHIT! They couldn’t find that before???? This was an email that was sent YEARS ago. The district’s inbox doesn’t hold that much. I know that because I worked for them. They would have had to dig this up in their delete folder along with everything else they dug up. LIARS. If this email wasn’t disclosed they would have had a very strong defense that my child’s teacher wasn’t aware of their disability which would have been a game changer in their favour. So, this was a huge win for me.

Now about document disclosure in general. Which occurs after an unresolved mediation meeting. If they want to settle with you, you wont reach this stage. The document disclosure the lawyers gave me was friggen ridiculous. They basically try to overwhelm you with many pages of absolutely nothing. I wrote a report on a related issue I was advocating with a group of parents on, and it was 50 pages. They gave me that same report 12 times just connected to different people’s email as an attachment to make their disclosure bulk up. 600 pages of my own writing. Geez, thanks! Their document disclosure wasn’t anything I already had, and they resent me stuff I sent them back to me.

I had to FIGHT for every little piece of evidence that I got. And then when I was getting stuff through the MULITPLE applications I was sending. They were redacting stuff. I didn’t even know if they were allowed to do that or not. So I asked my case manager. They said I could ask to have it removed. So I did. And they were still sending me stuff not fully unredacted. So I had to ask again. I am telling you. Prying evidence out of them will take nothing but sheer persistence. But if they are fighting this hard to keep it, you know it is GOLD. And oh boy!!! Was it ever. Like fall of your chair kind of evidence. I can’t believe staff were putting this stuff in writing. I can tell you the district has since tightened up what they document. For parents who are now struggling with the district not willing to document anything. Sorry folks. I think I had something to do with that. The district learned their lesson.

Another thing I want to tell you about documents. If they keep resending you document packages and shuffling things around with new dates and new subject headings. You can file an improper conduct for that. Keep a list of all of the shady stuff they are doing to try and exhaust you. Wait until you have a bunch of good stuff and then nail them. The form to write an Improper Conduct application is the same as the 7.1 form just tick off the box GA12 – Order another party to pay costs because of their improper conduct.

Lawyers should not be taking advantage of the fact that you are self-representing. But some lawyers will do that. You can also file a complaint against them personally with the Law Society. Here is the Code of Conduct for Lawyers in BC.

Ok, so long story short.

  1. Be pleasantly persistent. Be a cheetah. It is going to take time. Cheetah’s are very very patient. File the complaints you need to file. If you lose your shit in the meantime, they will use it against you and you will go absolutely no where. They can file an improper conduct complaint on you too. Which they would love to do to get the case dismissed. You need to be extremely civil. Here are 5 rules on how to be untouchable. You want them to be the ones you can nail in an improper conduct complaint, if necessary.
    .
  2. They will not give you everything you need. You are going to need to be a detective. Wait for the right time. File your complaints. You are going to need to hunt for documents very strategically. Unfortunately if often takes the teeth of a legal process to force this evidence out of them.
    .
  3. If they start playing funky-monkey games with you. Don’t lose your shit. You have options to complain that they are not going to like.
    .

And that my friends is the tale of getting documents.

Hopefully you can use this information to help you all in your search.

Stay strong out there!

Posted on

Teacher’s Regulation Branch (TRB) Q & A

People often have a lot of questions about the TRB complaint process. I have formatted this blog as a question-and-answer (Q & A) page by taking the responses from the annual report 2024-2025.

Why do some complaints get posted publicly and some don’t?

From page 4:

“To begin with, not everything that may be the subject of discipline by an employer warrants intervention at the regulatory level. As Commissioner, I must take into account a number of factors in considering whether to take disciplinary action against a teacher. Among those considerations is the public interest. I generally do not consider it in the public interest to pursue disciplinary action in matters that do not in some way
directly impact the welfare of students, or significantly impact the reputation of the teaching profession. Matters such as abuse of sick leave or conflict between staff are generally better dealt with at the employer/employee level.


Furthermore, it is important to remember that the regulatory scheme does not hold teachers to a standard of perfection. As with us all, teachers have good days and bad days, and sometimes they make mistakes. Not all such mistakes warrant disciplinary action at the regulatory level. It is only where teachers’ actions rise to the level of a marked departure from what is expected of them that disciplinary action at the regulatory level will be taken.”

How do we know if their behaviour has been a marked departure?

From page 5

“When determining if a teacher’s behaviour amounts to misconduct or incompetence, the conduct is measured against established sets of regulatory standards. In the case of teachers holding a certificate of qualification, the
conduct is assessed against the Professional Standards for BC Educators as established by the British Columbia
Teachers’ Council under the Teachers Act “

How do you file a complaint against a Teacher in BC? What are the stages?

When you first make a complaint by visiting this site Make a Teacher Complaint to the Commissioner your complaint will start with the Preliminary Review.

From page 6-7

  1. Intake
    * Filing the complaint

2. Preliminary Review

Each report or complaint that is submitted to me undergoes a preliminary review. During this process I
examine any material that accompanied the complaint or report, and any additional information that was
received by the PCU. The Teachers Act provides that I must determine whether:

  • the matter is not within my jurisdiction (for example,
    whether the matter relates to a current or previously
    certified teacher),
  • the matter is frivolous or made in bad faith,
  • the matter has no reasonable prospect of resulting
    in an adverse finding by a hearing panel,
  • it is in the public interest to take any further
    action, and
  • the matter has been pursued in a timely manner.
    .

3. Deferal?

4. Then the Commissioner may decide to investigate the complaint.

5. The Consent Resolution (which you will see posted publicly is in place of a hearing. To read more details of this whole complaint process, you can read page 6-7 of the annual report.

6. Hearing (very rare)

Are complaints increasing?

Yes. From page 3 “while complaints from the public remain stable, reports are up from 175 to 201”

That means school districts are filing more reports on their staff.

What is the criteria for the school to report a teacher?

From page 5

“Legally, school employers must make a report to me when a teacher has been suspended, disciplined for serious misconduct or dismissed. If a teacher resigns, the superintendent or independent school principal must report the circumstances if it is in the public interest to do so. In addition, the superintendent or independent school principal must make a report, if it is in the public interest, when a teacher’s conduct or competence is considered to be in breach of the applicable standards.”

Can a teacher have a complaint filed against them for not following an IEP?

Yes. From page 14, you can see that 16 complaints/reports were filed for “Failure to follow Individual Education Plans or Failure to create an inclusive learning environment.”

Can I file a complaint against my child’s principal?

Yes. From page 5 in large font, “In this report, the term “teacher” refers to an individual who holds a Certificate
of Qualification, a Letter of Permission or an Independent School Teaching Certificate. “Teacher” includes superintendents, principals, vice-principals, and classroom teachers.”

*********

Here is the annual TRB report for 2024-25

You can read about the statistics of how many complaints were filed, how many reached a consent resolution and more and all the different categories of complaints that they fall into. I find this to be very interesting information.

This annual report is also listed with other annual reports I keep track of on my Annual Report page.

Here is the link to access the discipline database and see discipline outcomes.

To learn some tips and important information of lived experience before you file, see my TRB page.

Posted on

Policy Change/Training in Tribunal Decision?

This is very interesting!!

This person won their case in a hearing! Woohoo!

Employee R v. B.H. Allen Building Centre Ltd. dba RONA and others, 2026 BCHRT 105

This part I haven’t seen before in a decision.

*******

[76]           Employee R did not expand on his request with respect to policy changes or training during the hearing or in his closing submissions, and no evidence was presented by either party with respect to this matter. I find there is insufficient information before me to make any specific order in this regard, and I decline to do so.

********

If you are a parent and you want professional development training or policy to come out of your hearing order, if you win, you’d better ask for it! This is something to think about for anyone who wants to take their case to a hearing. You may want to add items like this in your closing submissions, just in case you win.

The fact that this is possible is very interesting!

Always ask, as you navigate the system. You never know what could happen.

For those interested in what the case is all about:

[1]               Employee R is a gay man who sought part-time employment at RONA to supplement his income during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was subjected to a homophobic slur at work by a colleague and filed a complaint with his employer in which he expressed concern about his safety. Subsequently, Employee R’s regular shift was cancelled and then he was terminated.

ORDER

[77]           I have found that the Respondents discriminated against Employee R in his employment based on his sexual orientation, in violation of s. 13 of the Code. Accordingly, I make the following orders:

a.    I declare that the Respondents’ conduct contravened s. 13 of the Code: s. 37(2)(b).

b.    I order the Respondents to cease the contravention and refrain from committing the same or similar contraventions: Code, s. 37(2)(a).

c.     I order the Respondents to jointly pay Employee R the following:

                                                     i.          $877.50 as compensation for wages lost because of the discrimination: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(ii).

                                                   ii.          $10,000 as compensation for injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(iii).

d.    Pre and post judgement interest based on the rates set out in the Court Order Interest Act.

Posted on

BC HRT – You need evidence. Hearsay from your child will not be enough.

The term “hearsay” in this context is when kids come home and tell us things that happened at school that we didn’t witness ourselves.

Here is the heart of the issue. ———- When your child comes home and tells you what happened in school that day—– that in of itself is not evidence the tribunal will automatically accept as fact just on its own. You need evidence. The tribunal will assign little weight to hearsay evidence, compared to staff who can testify firsthand to what they witnessed.

This is going to be a source of frustration. I just want to acknowledge that.

Naturally, the first question is – how do I collect evidence when I am not even there at the school?

Good question.

This is the pickle you are in. You need to gather evidence in other ways. Or consider that your child could testify.

There was a recent BC Human Rights Tribunal decision posted, and it lays out how all of the mother’s allegations were not accepted without evidence. Some of the evidence provided from the school conflicted with her allegations. We have the burden to prove that our allegations meet the discrimination test first. Then, when we complete that, it falls to the school district to justify it, or prove the allegations are not true, with evidence.

Here is the case.

Child D (by Mother D) v. The School District, 2026 BCHRT 106

Each allegation was not accepted by the tribunal because there was no evidence to support the allegation and/or to link the harm to the protected ground – Indigenous Identity. I highly suggest you read the case in full to fully grasp what requirements are needed for the tribunal. Each allegation is clearly listed and explained. I would basically need to cut and paste the whole case here to give you the full context.

I am going to come back to this case later, because if you are a family struggling with family law court issues, there are aspects of this case that highlight the school’s interaction with that. Two parents had different perspectives and take on the child’s education experience. If you are struggling with this – this case will be of interest to you.

Here is another case that went all the way to a hearing and deals with the issue of hearsay from a child.

*******

A and B obo Infant A v. School District C (No. 5), 2018 BCHRT 25 (CanLII)

[42]           I have assigned relatively little weight to the Mother’s evidence where it conflicted with the first-hand accounts given by the School Counsellor, Principal, Vice Principal, and Teachers H, M, and G. I have found the Mother’s hearsay evidence considerably less reliable than the direct evidence of reliable witnesses, where there is a conflict.

[37]           I am entitled to accept some, none or all of a witness’ testimony. Where there was disagreement in the evidence, my findings and reasons are set out. Where necessary to do so, I have assessed credibility and considered factors such as the witness’ demeanour, powers of observation, opportunity for knowledge, judgment, memory, and ability to describe clearly what they saw and heard….(continues)

[228]      In summary, none of these incidents amount to discrimination under the Code. The Mother made numerous allegations about the School District accepting the word of Caucasian students over that of her Child, but agreed in cross-examination, that she did not know the races of the other students involved. Contrary to her testimony, the students involved in the Second October 2015 Incident, April 2016 Incident, and November 2016 Incident were not Caucasian.

********

[44]           During cross-examination, the Mother responded to several questions regarding her testimony about her Child’s version of events by saying that she did not know or was not there. She acknowledged that most of her knowledge of the incidents came through her Child. I find that her son was more likely than not motivated to minimize his involvement in some incidents when reporting them to his Parents, so as to avoid discipline. For example, the Mother described disciplining the Child in relation to an incident where he swore at the Principal. She described their punishment as “Draconian”. (In retrospect, the Mother regretted using that word in her letter). As another example, regarding the November 2016 Incident, the Child only reported to his Parents that he grabbed another student by the collar, whereas I find, as a fact, that the Child choked a student, pushed him over a railing, and spat in his face.

********

Depending on their age and ability, you may want to consider having your child be a witness. Here is a blog about having your child testify. Does my child need to testify?

Here is a case example of a teenager who testified.

******

Student (by Parent) v. School District, 2023 BCHRT 237

[2]               I commend the Student for her participation in this difficult process. She gave evidence that was helpful, straightforward, and credible, and which I have relied on to decide this case. I also thank the Parent and representatives of the District for their hard work and sensitivity in presenting their respective cases.

******

Having your child testify will remove the issue of hearsay or double hearsay.

Also…document, document, document.

Because we are not there witnessing events, the more evidence we can have documented in emails, the better position we will be in to assess our complaint and the evidence we will need to prove our allegations.

Here are blogs on gathering evidence

Documentation
Improper Conduct – Hiding Disclosure – What documents to ask for
Why is Documentation so Important?
Evidence of Harm. Effective advocacy in Education
How to Gather Evidence

Remember, we have to prove the elements of the discrimination test. The burden falls on the person filing the complaint to provide evidence that these things occurred.

Broe v. School Board of Education

[57]           For the reasons that follow, I find that Ms. Broe has not met her burden of proving the elements of her case.

Discrimination Test

Moore v. BC (Education), 2012 SCC 61. To prove discrimination, a complainant has to prove that:

  1. they have a characteristic protected by the Human Rights Code [Code];
  2. they experienced an adverse impact with respect to an area protected by the Code; and
  3. the protected characteristic was a factor in the adverse impact.

*******

I want you to be successful and prepared. The more you understand human rights law and how this get APPLIED and interpreted by the tribunal, the better possion you will be in to assess your case, what to ask for if you are seeking legal advice, and what steps you need to take now to either resolve your issues or make your case through a complaint.

Need help? Here is the list of people/organizations who may be able to help you.

Posted on

Disability – Related Adverse Impact (Dismissal Application)

School Employee Files Human Rights Complaint

This is an employment case, and the employee is in the school setting. I have only ever written on two other staff employee cases. I don’t focus on this at all, but every once in a while, a case will come along that is very helpful for others to know about. The legal test for employment and human rights can be very specific.

Here are the two other cases:

School Employee
Education Assistant – Employment Human Rights Complaint
A HR Decision for School Employees

This case will now be added in that section as the third one.

Dismissal Application – School Employee

This is a short dismissal application decision. It’s a pretty simple one, and for that reason, this is a great one to highlight some key points.

Misiak v. Board of Education of School District No. 36 (Surrey), 2026 BCHRT 98

[17]           At a hearing, Mr. Misiak would have to establish that he has a disability, that the District treated him adversely, and that the adverse treatment was connected to his physical disability: Moore v. BC (Education),  2012 SCC 61at para. 33. Mr. Misiak is not required to prove the complaint at this time but need only point to some evidence capable of taking the complaint “out of the realm of conjecture”: Berezoutskaiaat para. 24. The threshold to move the complaint forward to a hearing is low.

[18]           The District says there is no evidence that Mr. Misiak has suffered a disability related adverse impact and his compliant has not been taken out of the realm of conjecture. I agree.

*******

He had an injury to his elbow from 2018 that limited what he could do with his left arm.

********

[20]           The materials show WorkSafeBC advised that Mr. Misiak was limited in performing repetitive motion with his left arm, and forceful or sustained gripping with his left hand. The undisputed evidence of the District is that Mr. Misiak was placed in a job that does not require repetitive motions with his left arm or any forceful or sustained gripping. Mr. Misiak has not identified any accommodation that was recommended by WorkSafeBC, or that he requested, that was not implemented.

[19]           ……..The District provided detailed evidence of the recommendations made by WorkSafeBC and how they implemented each recommendation. While Mr. Misiak says in his response that his WorkSafeBC claim was denied and he was not accommodated, the evidence before me shows the District implemented all of the recommendations made by WorkSafeBC.

[22]           Mr. Misiak’s submissions are general complaints about the conduct of members of the health and safety committee at meetings, and the quality of air filters in schools. It is unclear on the materials what equipment Mr. Misiak is saying he had to supply for himself. He says the District took a long time to purchase and install new drill presses for the school’s woodworking program but has not pointed to how this is related to any physical disability he has. Similarly, Mr. Misiak alleges someone stood in front of him during a health and safety meeting and he was unable to respond to questions. Mr. Misiak has not provided any information that links his experience at a meeting to any disability. The District points out that there is no evidence to support Mr. Misiak’s allegation that he was not paid for his work.

*******

Four points to highlight

* The test to move a complaint past the dismissal stage is LOW….but you still have requirements you must meet.

** You will need to be able to identify your disability-related adverse impact. Not just any adverse impact. It has to pass the discrimination test.

*** You need to point to some kind of evidence that supports what you are claiming.

**** You can have unfair, horrible stuff happen to you, but it doesn’t mean that it is discrimination. There is not going to be legal remedies for all of the negative experiences you have in your life, or for all of the horrible things that people are going to do to you.

You will save yourself a lot of unnecessary pain and deprive the lawyers of their billable hours by understanding what complaint systems can create change and what those systems need from you in order to be successful. There are limitations in all of them, and they are all connected to different legislation. There are also complaint avenues or resolution avenues as an employee that I do not mention in this blog or on my website, as I primarily focus on parents advocating on behalf of their children. Information on complaint system options.

Parents & caregivers, we too have to focus on our kids’ disability-related needs, and how the harm they experience is connected to those needs, to be able to pass the discrimination test. We too, have an education case from the tribunal that has been very clear that not all negative experiences are discrimination.

Discrimination Test

3 questions.

  1. Does your child have a disability?
  2. Did they experience harm?
  3. Was the harm connected to their disability?
    .

X by Y v. Board of Education of School District No. Z, 2024 BCHRT 72

[110] ….I accept that these incidents which X relayed to Y were upsetting to X. I appreciate that the interactions may have fed into X’s general feelings of unease at school, but the fact alone that these events may have happened is not enough, in itself, to establish that X’s disability factored into them. Not all negative experiences are discrimination. Even accepting that these incidents occurred, I did not hear evidence that could establish, on a balance of probabilities, that X’s disability was a factor in the conduct of the adults involved in these interactions.