Connect with us

Red Right Videos

Man Refused Promotions For Not Being “Gay Enough” Gets Court Ruling On His Case

News For You

Man Refused Promotions For Not Being “Gay Enough” Gets Court Ruling On His Case

Here’s something you don’t hear about every day. A bank employee filed a discrimination complaint against Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce claiming that he was denied promotions in the company for not being gay.

Usually, matters like this are completely reversed and there are homosexuals claiming discrimination against employers or businesses because they’re homosexual.

But get this, the court actually ruled in favor of the man which is really astonishing.

According to The Daily Wire,

The National Post reports, “An investigator with the human rights commission was assigned to look into the complaint. CIBC officials were interviewed — but not the manager who allegedly made the remarks about only gay and bisexual men being promoted. That manager, the investigator was told, was on ‘extended leave of absence.’”

Jagadeesh was employed by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce in Toronto as a financial services representative. He claims he was repeatedly turned down for promotions. Jagadeesh said he met alone with his manager on Sept. 15, 2015, and the manager said every male manager in the office was was gay or bisexual, and followed by informing him of his zero chances for promotion unless he joined the group.

The National Post adds, “Jagadeesh claims the manager said this was why young male employees with little or no qualifications were promoted; told him to ‘be smart and learn’; and then allegedly asked Jagadeesh what he thought of him.” According to Jagadeesh, he told his boss that he simply viewed him as his manager, that he had no problem working with anyone, and that he was heterosexual.

The judge in the case, Judge Fuhrer, wrote in her decision:

… it must be noted the Commission did not review any of Mr. Jagadeesh’s evidence itself, instead relying exclusively on the Investigator’s summarization of this evidence. This is evident because the Commission, though it acknowledged the allegations of breach of procedural fairness and natural justice in Mr. Jagadeesh’s Notice of Application, declined to provide Mr. Jagadeesh’s rebuttal evidence as part of the certified tribunal record, asserting it was not before the decision maker and therefore shielded from review …

Mr. Jagadeesh was not asking the Commission to re-conduct the investigation; instead, he directly pointed to parts of his Reply submissions he believed the Investigator overlooked or otherwise misconstrued, and requested the Commission consider this. In such circumstances, where the Applicant alleges the Investigator’s Section 40/41 Report is under-inclusive and where the Applicant points to evidence previously provided to substantiate that allegation, the Commission is required to consider the evidence. Failing to do so is further evidence that their review of his Reply submissions was not thorough.

TL;DR – She granted judicial review since the Commission ignored Mr. Jagadeesh’s complaint.

Continue Reading
Comments

More in News For You

GET MORE STORIES LIKE THIS

IN YOUR INBOX!

Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.

To Top