“A man, working in a laundromat?” It wasn’t really a question, nor a rhetorical device. She was just floored I’d ask why the help wanted sign on the window explicitly said “Woman wanted for 3 evening shifts per week”.
When I indicated the laundromat on Duluth St. had 2 men working there, she told me that when they hired a man at their previous location, they lost a lot of customers.
See also a blog entry from a year ago: Women can’t lift heavy weights.
What should I do? Report, boycott, ignore or try and cajole?
1 comment so far ↓
You could report…although your personal chances of success, without having to spend money for a lawyer, are close to none. Unless, you REALLY wanted to work at that laundromat, in which case you could invoke article 15 of the Canadian Charter, which states that: “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.” In order to prove a breech to this article, one must prove the following: 1. The right to equality is not respected, meaning that the measure adopted must establish a clear difference of treatment, and this difference MUST cause a prejudice ; 2. This difference of treatment MUST be discriminatory.
So, with all this said, you should not waste your time with the laundromat bitch, although her motives are indeed more than questionable. As for the Metro case, it’s a much bigger deal, and if, only IF, more women wanting to become “packers” are not hired because of their so called weakness, it would be a good idea to sue, ensuring all those who applied for that job a “good” amount of money. Enjoy!
Leave a Comment