Letter to the Editor
In the March 2, 2011 issue of the Leader Post it was reported that five of the past six living Chiefs of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) were calling for the resignation of the present Chief Guy Lonechild. Their stated reasons that the charge of impaired driving against Chief Lonechild have resulted in "turmoil and conflict" and has compromised his position as a voice for First Nations citizens.
Chief Lonechild has a responsibility to deal with the consequences of driving while impaired. It is clear from his reported statements that he is prepared to do so. He says that he recognizes that he has an alcohol problem and it is his intention to seek help. Lonechild was quoted as saying that he plans "to seek help from an addictions counselor," and has asked for cultural support as part of his wellness plan. We applaud this effort and are hopeful he will succeed.
It would appear that the past Chiefs have little understanding of the nature of the disease of alcoholism. Would the Chiefs have made the same comments if Chief Lonechild was suffering from another disease such as diabetes or cancer? No less than the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the duty to accommodate someone who is suffering from alcoholism is a fundamental legal obligation. Regardless of whether Chief Lonechild is an elected official or an employee, the FSIN has this responsibility. Anything less than accommodating Chief Lonechild while he works at recovering from his "alcohol problem" is applying direct and adverse effect discrimination.
This incident involving a public figure like Chief Lonechild has a positive side. Upon his conviction he stated that "alcohol isn't good for Guy Lonechild. It isn't good for many of our people." This is an opportune time for all of the people in the province and its various institutions to seriously begin to look at the effect alcoholism and addiction is having on our communities. The social problems we are facing in Saskatchewan include poverty, slum housing, unemployment, crime, child prostitution, poor health, early deaths, child and spousal abuse, addiction related disease, fetal alcohol syndrome and many other related issues. Countless lives, let alone money, could be saved if we were to treat the root of the problem which has clearly been demonstrated to be the disease of addiction and alcoholism. We need leaders to mobilize all of us in what needs to be done. Perhaps the past chiefs of the FSIN with their obvious political skills can be those leaders.
Sincerely,
Foster Monson
President
Saskatchewan Association for the Betterment of
Addiction Services
27061 420 Albert St.
Regina, Sk
S4R 8R8
(306) 546-4059
527-7707
It comes from two sources: (i) the applicable human rights legislation; and (ii) rulings from the Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court's three-step test in Meiorin simultaneously combines the previously distinct legal approaches towards analysizing "direct" and "adverse effect" discrimination, and, in doing so, ends the prevailing confusion over how and when to apply these tests. When assessing the validity of a challenged standard or practice, a legal decision-maker is required to ask the following three questions:
i) Has the employer adopted the challenged standard or practice for a purpose rationally connected to the performance of the job?
ii) Has the employer adopted the standard in an honest and good faith belief that it is necessary to fulfil the work-related purpose? And
iii) Is the standard reasonably necessary, in that it would be impossible to accommodate
