Alberta Human Rights Commission dismisses Edmonton mask complaints

Alberta Human Rights Commission dismisses Edmonton mask complaints

The Alberta Human Rights Commission has dismissed a pair of complaints filed by two men who say they were discriminated against when they didn’t wear masks inside retail stores last fall.

One incident took place at a Costco store last November and the other at a Peoples Jewellers store in October.

The decisions were released Aug. 16, 2021, signed by Michael Gottheil, chief of the commission and tribunals.

In both cases, Gottheil found the companies were reasonable in insisting customers and employees wear masks to protect public health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Nov. 17, 2020, Peter Szeles went into a Costco in Edmonton and told staff he had a disability that exempted him from wearing a face mask.

An employee suggested Szeles could wear a face shield instead, but he refused. Szeles argued that a face shield was stigmatizing, was meant to single him out as a person with a disability and would subject him to humiliation.

An altercation ensued, the police were called over and Szeles was removed from the store, the written decision says.

A clip of the interaction is also posted on Szeles’s Facebook page. The video shows Szeles on his knees, refusing to stand up and leave the store, with two officers carrying him out and putting him in a police van.

WATCH | Police remove Szeles from the Costco:

Man arrested in Edmonton Costco after refusing to wear mask 1:53 In November 2020, Peter Szeles was arrested in an Edmonton Costco following an altercation that occured after the man refused to wear a mask inside the store. Szeles' complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission was dismissed in August 2021. 1:53

Costco submitted several arguments in response to Szeles’s complaint, including that it provided appropriate alternatives, like the option to wear a face shield in the store and various online shopping and home delivery options.

In the second case, James Beaudin was blocked from entering a Peoples Jewellers store in Edmonton. He said health reasons prevented him from wearing a mask.

The store staff pointed out alternatives, including phone and online shopping, with free delivery or curb-side pickup. Beaudin objected, but the store staff was firm, and he was told to leave, the written decision says.

Balance of rights

Jessica Eisen, a University of Alberta law professor specializing in human rights, said the commission’s decisions are understandable based on the Alberta Human Rights Act.

According to the decisions, the companies showed they were responding in good faith to the seriousness of the pandemic, she said.

“They presented lots of evidence to the effect that there was a really good reason for these policies — they were needed to protect their employees and to protect the other customers in the stores,” she said.

Eisen said human rights laws are based on balance.

“I think a lot of people are under the misconception that human rights acts and codes generally protect people’s right to do whatever they want in all circumstances,” Eisen said. “In fact, human rights laws are designed to protect fundamental interests in a range of circumstances.”

Discrimination on the basis of race, religion and disability is covered in human rights legislation, but in these cases, businesses showed they were trying to do the right thing in protecting people’s health while providing options to customers, she said.

The two decisions are among more than 100 complaints the Alberta Human Rights Commission has received since March 2020 related to mandatory masks and vaccines. Cam Stewart, a spokesperson with the HRC, said the commission has accepted them as formal complaints and is in the process of reviewing them.

Most complaints are resolved in conciliation, investigation or at the director’s office before going to a tribunal hearing, he noted.

While investigators are going through the complaints process, the details of the complaints are confidential, Stewart said.

@natashariebe

Alberta Human Rights Tribunal dismisses two complaints on mask mandates

The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal (ABHRT) dismissed complaints earlier this month from two men, Peter Szeles and James Beaudin, who refused to wear protective masks inside two separate businesses. The decision was made public on Monday.

Szeles and Beaudin argued that their respective disabilities prevented them from wearing masks and that the businesses’ health and safety policies were discriminatory in violation of § 4 of the Alberta Human Rights Act (AHRA).

Szeles entered an Edmonton Costco in November 2020 and refused to wear a mask citing a disability. The employees offered Szeles a face shield or drive-by pick-up as alternatives, which Szeles also refused. The situation escalated and police were called who eventually forcefully removed Szeles out of the store when he refused to leave.

A human rights investigator assigned to the incident recommended the complaint be dismissed on grounds that Costco’s policies were reasonable considering the COVID-19 pandemic. The investigator found that, while the provincial government did provide exemptions to the mask mandate, it recommended businesses institute their own policies regarding mask use. Additionally, the investigators noted that Szeles did not offer any medical proof that wearing a face covering or mask would be impossible given his disability. Thus, the investigator concluded that Szeles’s decision was a matter of personal choice. Szeles then requested a review of this determination.

Chief of the Commission and Tribunals for the ABHRT, Michael Gottheil, upheld the investigator’s findings. While agreeing with Szeles that Costco “issued a policy that had an adverse impact on persons with certain disabilities,” Gottheil noted that Costco offered reasonable accommodations for Szeles.

Limitations to the right to be free from discrimination maybe justified under the AHRA when the limitation or rule has been adopted for valid reasons in the good faith belief that it is necessary, and it is impossible to accommodate persons who may be adversely affected without incurring undue hardship. This three-part test was established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Meiorin, which adjudicated the discriminatory termination of a disabled employee.

To satisfy the third part of the test, “the respondent must show they have considered the least intrusive options, and made every effort to accommodate the complainant’s . . . needs.” Gottheil wrote that this approach is “premised on the need to develop standards that accommodate the potential contribution of all.”

In dismissing Szeles’ request, Gottheil stated that the restrictions are reasonable in the face of public health and epidemiological information regarding COVID-19 that face shields are an accepted alternative to face masks. Gottheil added that Szeles provided no material evidence showing that the various other accommodation efforts provided by Costco were unreasonable given the circumstances.

James Beaudin made similar allegations against a Peoples Jewellers store, also in Edmonton, after he was barred from entry in October 2020 for refusing to wear a mask at the request of the store’s employees. Beaudin insisted that he was “exempt” from the public health policy at the time because of health reasons. Beaudin, like Szeles, filled a complaint with ABHRT that he was discriminated against by not being allowed to enter the store.

As with Szeles, an investigator assigned to Beaudin’s case recommended that his complaint be dismissed on grounds that the store’s policies were reasonable in light of the pandemic. Beaudin’s request for review of this determination was also dismissed because the store “provided information that it developed and introduced the policy for a valid purpose (employee and public safety), and that the policy was introduced in good faith.” Gottheil wrote that the “obligation…[is] to accommodate the effects of a discriminatory policy, to the point of undue hardship,” and that the respondent “developed a comprehensive and scientifically based policy” to address the safety risk posed by COVID-19.

M: 3 Stocks Set to Gain as Weddings are Expected to Skyrocket

Wedding-related businesses have suffered over the past year because countless couples were forced to delay their wedding plans due to pandemic-related restrictions. In addition, the resurgence of COVID-19 cases due to the rapid spread of the Delta variant is now a new cause of worry for some.

However, increasing vaccinations and the reopening of several venues are expected to boost weddings in the coming months. According to the Wedding Report, 1.9 million weddings are expected to occur this year, and there could be 2.5 million weddings next year. This surge is expected to benefit businesses offering wedding dresses, jewelry, etc.

Macy’s, Inc. (M), Signet Jewelers Limited (SIG), and Urban Outfitters, Inc. (URBN) are well-positioned to benefit from the increasing demand for wedding-related products as the number of weddings increases. So, it could be wise to bet on them now.

Macy’s, Inc. (M)

One of the nation’s premier omnichannel fashion retailers, M’s portfolio of brands includes Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s, and Bluemercury. The Cincinnati, Ohio company has roughly 726 retail stores and also operates through its websites and mobile applications. In addition, it offers wedding registry services.

On August 26, 2021, Bloomingdale’s launched its first “Bloomie’s” store in Fairfax, Virginia. Also, on August 19, 2021, M announced a partnership with WHP Global to bring together Macy’s and Toys”R”Us. These strategic moves are expected to help M expand in the retail space.

For its fiscal second quarter, ended July 31, 2021, M’s net revenue increased 58.7% year-over-year to $5.65 billion, with comparable sales up 61.2% year-over-year. The company’s operating income came in at $597 million, versus a $631 million loss in the prior year. Its net income was $345 million compared to a loss of $431 million in the year-ago period. Also, its EPS came in at $1.08, versus a $1.39 loss per share in the prior year’s quarter.

M’s revenue is expected to come in at $23.63 billion in its fiscal year 2022, representing a 36.2% year-over-year rise. The company’s EPS is expected to increase 272.4% year-over-year to $3.81 in the current year. It surpassed the Street’s EPS estimates in each of the trailing four quarters. Over the past nine months, the stock has gained 116.7% in price to close yesterday’s trading session at $22.54.

It’s no surprise that M has an overall B rating in the POWR Ratings, equating to a Buy in our proprietary rating system. The POWR Ratings assess stocks by 118 different factors, each with its own weighting.

In addition, it has an A grade for Growth and Value, and a B grade for Quality. As a result, M is ranked #20 of 64 stocks in the A-rated Fashion & Luxury industry. Click here to see the additional POWR Ratings for M (Momentum, Stability, and Sentiment).

Signet Jewelers Limited (SIG)

The world’s largest retailer of diamond jewelry and the largest specialty jewelry retailer in the U.S., U.K., and Canada, SIG’s offerings include engagement rings. The Hamilton, Bermuda company operates roughly 2,800 stores under various brand names, including Kay Jewelers, Zales, Jared, H.Samuel, Ernest Jones, and Peoples Jewellers.

Alliance Data Systems Corporation (ADS) announced in May 2021 that its Card Services business had signed a multi-year renewal agreement with SIG to continue providing private label credit card services. The company’s CEO, Virginia C. Drosos, said, “Our partnership with Alliance Data has been instrumental in providing data and insights that enable Signet to reach customers with the right offer at just the right time.”

For its fiscal second quarter, ended July 31, 2021, SIG’s net revenue increased 101.4% year-over-year to $1.79 billion. The company’s operating income came in at $225.40 million compared to an $89.70 million loss in the previous year. Its net income was $216 million compared to a $90 million loss in the year-ago period. Also, its EPS was $3.60 compared to a loss per share of $1.73 in the prior year’s quarter.

For its fiscal year 2022, SIG’s revenue and EPS are expected to grow 28.5% and 242.7%, respectively, year-over-year to $6.71 billion and $7.23. In addition, it surpassed consensus EPS estimates in each of the trailing four quarters. Over the past month, the stock has gained 25.4% in price to close yesterday’s trading at $80.66.

SIG’s strong fundamentals are reflected in its POWR ratings. The stock has an overall B rating, which equates to a Buy in our proprietary rating system. In addition, it has an A grade for Growth and Momentum, and a B grade for Value and Quality.

SIG is ranked #16 in the Fashion & Luxury industry. The stock is also graded for Stability and Sentiment. Click here to see all the SIG ratings.

Urban Outfitters, Inc. (URBN)

Lifestyle specialty retail company URBN operates through two segments: Retail and Wholesale. The company’s portfolio of global consumer brands includes Anthropologie, Free People, and Nuuly. Also, it sells wedding dresses and offers wedding registry services through Anthropologie. URBN is headquartered in Philadelphia, Pa.

On August 24, 2021, URBN announced the launch of Nuuly Thrift, a resale marketplace that will open in the fall this year. This is expected to help the company capitalize on shifting customer behavior and gain market share in the rapidly expanding online resale market.

URBN’s total revenue increased 44.1% year-over-year to $1.16 billion for its fiscal second quarter, ended July 31, 2021. The company’s income from operations came in at $165.85 million, up 138.9% year-over-year. Its net income in the quarter was $127.26 million, representing a 269.9% year-over-year rise. Also, its EPS came in at $1.28, up 265.7% year-over-year.

For its fiscal year 2022, analysts expect URBN’s revenue to be $4.49 billion, representing a 30.1% year-over-year rise. The company’s EPS is expected to increase 31,900.0% year-over-year to $3.20 in fiscal 2022. In addition, it surpassed the consensus EPS estimates in each of the trailing four quarters. Over the past nine months, the stock has gained 23.6% to close yesterday’s trading session at $33.82.

URBN’s POWR Ratings reflect this promising outlook. The stock has an overall B rating, which equates to a Buy in our POWR Rating system. Also, the stock has an A grade for Momentum, and a B grade for Value and Quality.

Click here to see URBN’s ratings for Growth, Stability, and Sentiment as well. Again, URBN is ranked #26 in the Fashion & Luxury industry.

M shares were trading at $22.93 per share on Thursday morning, up $0.39 (+1.73%). Year-to-date, M has gained 103.82%, versus a 22.13% rise in the benchmark S&P 500 index during the same period.

About the Author: Manisha Chatterjee

Since she was young, Manisha has had a strong interest in the stock market. She majored in Economics in college and has a passion for writing, which has led to her career as a research analyst. More…

More Resources for the Stocks in this Article