Datt had worked for McAdams restaurant for 23 years (taking orders, cleaning) when in 2007 she came down with a skin condition on her hands that was...

Datt had worked for McAdams restaurant for 23 years (taking orders, cleaning) when in 2007 she came down with a skin condition on her hands that was made worse by frequent hand washing. She took several short-term disability leaves but her condition always worsened after she returned to work. McAdams said that frequent hand washing was necessary to maintain acceptable sanitary conditions, to meet both government regulations and its own hygiene policies. For example, the restaurant has a timed system where a timer sounds each hour, and all crew members and the manager must wash their hands. Datt’s doctor reported that she could not perform any job requiring frequent hand washing but there were duties she could perform, including cash, some food preparation, and some cleaning. However, in August 2009 the benefits provider told Datt she would not be able to return to work because “restaurant work was not good for her” and offered her a three-month job search program. In November 2009, McAdams terminated her. Datt filed a human rights application.

a.  Did Datt have a disability under Ontario’s Human Rights Code?  Explain (3 points).

b.  Was this a prima facie case of discrimination?  Explain, being sure to identify all three parts of the test (3 points).

c.  Assuming that Datt did have a disability, did the employer have a duty to accommodate Datt and if so, did it fulfill that duty up to the point of undue hardship? Explain your answer  (4 points).