A Japanese restaurant was given a punishment of a $10,000 fine for making black customers pay an extra $3.80 as a service charge..“Canadian courts have long recognized the presence and pernicious effects of anti-Black racism,” ruled the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal..“At best, the service charge was a highly discretionary if not arbitrary charge with no clear guidance on the criteria staff were to use on whether to apply it,” wrote Roslyn Mounsey, an adjudicator with the Tribunal. .“The Supreme Court has made it clear that systems and policies must be designed to be inclusive of all persons.”.According to Blacklock’s Reporter, the decision came after an incident in 2019 where two Black friends went to have lunch at a restaurant called Osaka Japanese Cuisine in North York, ON. .When they finished eating, they were given a bill that included an extra charge of 10% called a “service charge,” but nobody explained why. .Later, they found out that when they asked other diners who were Caucasian or Asian if they had to pay the same extra charge, those people “said no.”.“When the applicants persisted in their inquiries, the manager then started yelling at them and indicating the other customers did not have a similar charge because they were paying by debit,” said the Tribunal. .“The manager then began yelling for them to ‘get out!’ and other customers stopped eating and began looking at the commotion.”.Adjudicator Mounsey said that while there was no evidence the diners’ race prompted the incident, “they assert that they were the only Black women in the restaurant.” .The Ontario Human Rights Code states “every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities without discrimination because of race.” .The $10,000 award for damages reflected “the historic economic disadvantage suffered by racialized groups,” wrote Mounsey..“Although this was a single incident of relatively short duration, the seriousness of the differential treatment is such that a significant award ought to be made,” wrote Mounsey. .“The vulnerability of the applicants as Black women cannot be overlooked in assessing a remedy in this case. The respondent’s discriminatory conduct targeted a historically disadvantaged and vulnerable group.”.Different Human Rights tribunals have made different decisions in cases like these. .In 2018, the Ontario Tribunal fined a restaurant in Toronto $10,000 because they made Black customers pay for their meals before eating. .In 2021, the Québec Tribunal gave a Muslim family $15,300 in compensation after someone yelled at them in a food court, saying “Get out of my country. I am talking to you, the one with the veil.”.In a case from 2021, the British Columbia Tribunal did not agree with a complaint made by a guest at a hostel. The guest said the staff told him to go back to Québec, but the tribunal did not find the complaint valid. .Similarly, in 2019, the Alberta Tribunal dismissed a complaint made by an indigenous man who said he was mistreated at a Tim Hortons in Calgary. He claimed that the staff called him “chief,” but the tribunal did not agree with his complaint.
A Japanese restaurant was given a punishment of a $10,000 fine for making black customers pay an extra $3.80 as a service charge..“Canadian courts have long recognized the presence and pernicious effects of anti-Black racism,” ruled the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal..“At best, the service charge was a highly discretionary if not arbitrary charge with no clear guidance on the criteria staff were to use on whether to apply it,” wrote Roslyn Mounsey, an adjudicator with the Tribunal. .“The Supreme Court has made it clear that systems and policies must be designed to be inclusive of all persons.”.According to Blacklock’s Reporter, the decision came after an incident in 2019 where two Black friends went to have lunch at a restaurant called Osaka Japanese Cuisine in North York, ON. .When they finished eating, they were given a bill that included an extra charge of 10% called a “service charge,” but nobody explained why. .Later, they found out that when they asked other diners who were Caucasian or Asian if they had to pay the same extra charge, those people “said no.”.“When the applicants persisted in their inquiries, the manager then started yelling at them and indicating the other customers did not have a similar charge because they were paying by debit,” said the Tribunal. .“The manager then began yelling for them to ‘get out!’ and other customers stopped eating and began looking at the commotion.”.Adjudicator Mounsey said that while there was no evidence the diners’ race prompted the incident, “they assert that they were the only Black women in the restaurant.” .The Ontario Human Rights Code states “every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities without discrimination because of race.” .The $10,000 award for damages reflected “the historic economic disadvantage suffered by racialized groups,” wrote Mounsey..“Although this was a single incident of relatively short duration, the seriousness of the differential treatment is such that a significant award ought to be made,” wrote Mounsey. .“The vulnerability of the applicants as Black women cannot be overlooked in assessing a remedy in this case. The respondent’s discriminatory conduct targeted a historically disadvantaged and vulnerable group.”.Different Human Rights tribunals have made different decisions in cases like these. .In 2018, the Ontario Tribunal fined a restaurant in Toronto $10,000 because they made Black customers pay for their meals before eating. .In 2021, the Québec Tribunal gave a Muslim family $15,300 in compensation after someone yelled at them in a food court, saying “Get out of my country. I am talking to you, the one with the veil.”.In a case from 2021, the British Columbia Tribunal did not agree with a complaint made by a guest at a hostel. The guest said the staff told him to go back to Québec, but the tribunal did not find the complaint valid. .Similarly, in 2019, the Alberta Tribunal dismissed a complaint made by an indigenous man who said he was mistreated at a Tim Hortons in Calgary. He claimed that the staff called him “chief,” but the tribunal did not agree with his complaint.
