Are you compliant? Do you know the AODA implementation phases and deadlines?
The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) was passed on June 13, 2005. The basic purpose of the act is to break down the barriers faced by persons with disabilities. The aim is to make Ontario more accessible to persons with disabilities by 2025 when 1 in 5 Canadians will be over 65 years. (Statistics Canada)
In the report Disability in Canada (2006), 15.5% of Ontarians had a disability and 47.2% of Ontarians aged 65 or over had a disability. Making our workplaces more accessible benefits all of us and it is the right thing to do. The Royal Bank of Canada estimates that the spending power of people with disabilities is about $25 billion each year. So besides being the right thing to do, it also makes good business sense.
Organizations Ontarians that provide goods and services are required to remove barriers that prevent a person with a disability from fully participating in society with dignity, independence, integration, and equal opportunity, in the same way as a person without a disability.
This legislation is being implemented in five phases as follows:
It makes sense to be proactive and learn what you need to do to meet the deadlines. And if you’ve missed the Customer Service deadline, it’s never too late to become compliant and help make Ontario accessible by 2025. We provide one-to-one coaching to help create policies, procedures, and practices and training programs suitable for your organization. Contact us if you need help.
Best regards, Joanne Royce
Royce & Associates
A Human Resources and Training Solutions company
Creating Happy, Healthy, & Productive Workplaces
The first #HRBookChat took place this week to discuss Drive by Daniel Pink. It was a great discussion made even better with the participation of the author @DanielPink and participants from around the world.
The HR book chat idea started in another chat held on Twitter on November 21, 2011 via #TEPHR. The Engagement Project in HR originates with Bonni Titgemeyer, an HR professional with experience in Canada and the USA. Her aim is to encourage HR discussions on an international basis. The #TEPHR chat was like a great big brainstorming session and the idea of #HRBookChat was incubated during that discussion. Alyssa Burkus ran with the idea and made it real, and #HRBookChat was born.
So on Monday, January 9th, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. the first #HRBookChat took place. According to Hash Tracking, there were 644 tweets, 130 tweeters, and 9.2 million impressions during the chat. Visit Hash Tracking, to view a permanent record of the chat, stats, Top 10 List, and transcript.
I learned about Storify when Larry Ferlazzo (http://bit.ly/AvvvOD) And Marissa Brassfield (http://sfy.co/Tvz) posted highlights after the book chat, including my Tweet about Trust. The storify highlights and chat transcript are kind of like a book review in 140 character Tweets.
And of course the HR people involved in the chat loved the book, including me as shown by the many sticky notes in my book. Time for an IPad, Kobo, or Kindle!
But now, the hard part starts – implementing the concepts in the workplace. A paradigm shift needs to happen moving away from the carrot and stick approach or punishment and reward, to creating a culture that supports the 3rd drive that allows for engagement through Purpose, Autonomy, and Mastery in the workplace. It starts with a tiny ripple that spreads.
Happy HRBookChatterer, Joanne
P.S. Oh, and my Tweet about Trust was Retweeted by Daniel Pink and many other people. That Tweet must have resonated with people, and it was kind of neat to see it spread across the world getting Retweeted. The Power of Twitter and Twitter Chats!
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.
At the Osgoode Employment Law Conference in December 2011, this is how lawyer Natalie MacDonald started her presentation on determining if a potential new hire is an employee or self-employed.
How do employers know the difference?
There are very good guidelines that help determine if an individual is an employee or self-employed. Sometimes companies pay employees on a short term contract without taking off any deductions. When they ask a few questions, they find that the individual is really an employee and should have regular payroll deductions. Hopefully this type of situation is an oversight and not a standard process. It puts the organization at risk for penalties and fines, but it costs the company so much more.
The Canadian Revenue Agency Guidelines outline steps to determine if an individual is an employee or self-employed and a detailed account of the liability for not making deductions. Here is a quick check list to get you started:
Control – Does the boss direct the person and tell him/her what to do? If the person doesn’t have control over work hours, and work flow, he/she is likely an employee.
Tools and Equipment – Does the employer supply the person with a computer, and a phone at work to do his/her job? An employee is not responsible for bringing his/her own laptop to work.
Subcontracting and hiring assistants – Does the individual have the opportunity to hire or subcontract an assistant and pay them out of his/her own pocket? If not, the person is an employee.
Financial Risk – Does the individual have to pay for mistakes? If a mistake happens that has a negative financial impact, the self-employed contractor most likely will have to discount the project impacting his/her own bottomline, and an employee is not expected to reach into their pocket to pay for his/her mistake.
Profit – Does the individual have the chance to profit? An employee earns income and bonus as per the policies and parameters set by the company, but they don’t have potential for profit.
Responsibility for investment and management – Does the individual have a capital investment in the company and make management decisions freely? If not, he/she is an employee.
Some might weigh the chances that they won’t get caught. Some might argue that it’s easy to pay them as a self-employed professional. But the risk is significant in more ways than one. Why? Because there is a risk to the organization of penalties, fines, and reimbursements as mentioned earlier. But there are other more intangible risks.
The deductions go to fund government programs that provide the Canadian identity of a more equal society. They help fund the Canadian Pension Fund and Employment Insurance when people need it most. What if every employer decided not to make deductions? Our way of living would be very different. And what is the risk of the most important intangible?
Actions speak louder than words. If it is okay for an employer to ignore the legislative criteria and requirements, is it okay for an employee to do the same with his employer? I don’t think so.
So if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck!
Best regards, Joanne Royce
Royce & Associates
A Human Resources and Training Solutions Company
Creating Happy, Healthy, and Productive Workplaces
Photo Credit: SXC, am y
Welcome to our blog. Use our insider tips on human resources, training, and interpersonal relationships to create your own happy, healthy, and productive workplace. We'll also comment on life in general and share info and highlights from books.