2. FAMILY

 

D. Maternity Benefits

 

Leading Cases

 

Bliss v. Attorney General of Canada [1979] 1 S.C.R. 183, Supreme Court of Canada

http://www.lawsite.ca/femlaw/bliss.htm

After giving birth Bliss was unemployed.  She was not entitled to full maternity benefits but she was also denied unemployment benefits because such benefits were not available for a period of six weeks after childbirth.  The Supreme Court found that the legislation was not discriminatory because any inequality between the sexes was created by nature and no by the legislation.

 

Brooks v. Canada Safeway ltd. [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1219, Supreme Court of Canada

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1989/1989scc46.html

The Safeway insurance plan provided benefits for loss of pay due to accident or sickness, but did not provide full benefits for 17 weeks for those who were unable to work due to pregnancy.  The Court found that the insurance policy discriminated against women.  This decision overturned the decision in Bliss v. Attorney General of Canada.

 

Ontario Cancer Treatment & Research Foundation v. Ontario Human Rights Commission, 38 O.R. (3d) 72; [1998] O.J. No. 193; Court File No. 565-96

A female Doctor worked for an employer that did not provide maternity benefits.  She chose to have her baby during her vacation leave but was unable to return to work due to illness.  Since her illness was related to her pregnancy the employer denied her sick benefits.  The Court found that denying a woman access to sick leave benefits constituted discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and therefore sex.