Tribunal finds discrimination, awards ‘declaratory and financial remedies’ of $10,000
The BC Human Rights Tribunal has found that a family‑run RONA store discriminated against a gay worker by cutting his regular shifts and then firing him shortly after he reported a homophobic slur.
The Tribunal ruled that B.H. Allen Building Centre Ltd. – operating under the RONA banner – along with office manager Stephen Allen and store manager Michael Allen, breached s. 13 of the Human Rights Code by discriminating against “Employee R” on the basis of sexual orientation.
“For the following reasons, I find the complaint is justified and I award declaratory and financial remedies,” wrote Tribunal Member Theressa Etmanski in Employee R v. B.H. Allen Building Centre Ltd. dba RONA and others, 2026 BCHRT 105.
Background to the complaint
The corporate respondent is a family‑owned business that has operated under the RONA banner since 1987. Stephen Allen is the office manager and Michael Allen is the store manager, and the case proceeded on the basis that it was a small, family‑run operation.
Employee R, a gay man originally from Iran, took a part‑time job there around Nov. 29, 2020, after his previous workplace closed during the COVID‑19 pandemic. He was regularly scheduled for two weekend shifts, while holding a professional job during the week to provide his main income.
Evidence before the BC Human Rights Tribunal showed he and his boyfriend – hired at the same time – were open about their relationship and sexual orientation at work. Text messages produced at the hearing showed the boyfriend referring to him as “my boyfriend” in conversations with a supervisor.
On or about Feb. 6, 2021, a 16‑year‑old co‑worker approached him at work and said: “Go f*** yourself faggot.” Etmanski found this was a “well‑known homophobic slur” and “self‑evidently connected to Employee R’s sexual orientation.”
Previously, the BC Human Rights Tribunal dealt with a case where a former B.C. school trustee was preparing to challenge a $750,000 penalty following a finding that he poisoned the workplace for LGBTQ+ teachers through a sustained public campaign against classroom resources on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Reporting incident and employer’s response
In the Employee R case, the employee testified that the remark deeply affected him given his experiences of homophobia in Iran, where homosexuality is illegal and can be punished as severely as death. He told the Tribunal he was worried about his safety and unsure how to respond given the teenager’s age.
He and his boyfriend tried to raise the issue internally, including posts in an employee group chat that was shut down for “inappropriate content.” They were later told that Stephen Allen was responsible for human resources at the store.
On or around Feb. 9, 2021, Employee R emailed Allen’s assistant, describing the comment as made “with rage and anger” and stating that he did “not feel safe” around the teenage co‑worker. The assistant confirmed that the email was passed on to Stephen Allen.
The respondents claimed there was an internal complaint process explained at orientation that he failed to use, but they produced no evidence of such a process. Etmanski wrote that “nothing in my analysis turns on whether another complaint process was available or if Employee R was, in fact, told about it.”
Shift cancellations and termination
Around the time of his complaint email, Employee R learned his upcoming Saturday shifts had been cancelled, while the teenage co‑worker remained on the schedule. The Tribunal found that losing his regular Saturday shift “is a reduction in hours and amounts to a loss of anticipated income,” and therefore an adverse impact under the Human Rights Code.
When he questioned the change, Michael Allen wrote that schedules were done weekly and “in the best interest of the stores needs,” adding that “this incident in no way would have caused you to lose a shift.” At the hearing, Stephen Allen said the “best interest of the store” included staff safety, tying the scheduling decision to the complainant’s safety concern.
Stephen Allen later told him the shifts were cancelled because he had said he did not feel safe working with the teenager. The Tribunal found no evidence that he requested a shift change, only that he reported an incident and its impact.
On Feb. 18, 2021, one day after he clarified that he wanted his Saturday shifts restored, Stephen Allen terminated him during probation, writing: “It has been determined that we are unable to meet your personal shift expectations.”
Tribunal findings and remedies
The Tribunal held that his loss of shifts and termination were adverse impacts, and that his sexual orientation was a factor, given the homophobic slur, his explicit safety concerns, the timing, and the absence of any other credible explanation. It drew an inference of discrimination that the respondents did not rebut.
Etmanski stressed that the Code “does not require an intention to discriminate but rather focuses on the impact of the conduct on the individual,” and confirmed that probation “does not relieve the Respondents of their human rights obligations.” Even on the respondents’ version of events, she found they were on notice of human rights implications due to the homophobic language used.
The BC Human Rights Tribunal ordered the respondents to cease and refrain from contravening the Code and declared that they had discriminated against Employee R based on sexual orientation. It awarded $877.50 in wage loss and $10,000 for injury to dignity, feelings and self‑respect, plus pre‑ and post‑judgment interest.
Nearly half of employees who identify as members of the LGBTQ+ community have left their employers because of lack of acceptance, according to a previous report.
