View cases - Stewart McKelvey

69[335] The one question relied upon, question # 13, reads:a) “What primary childcare arrangements do you currently have?A. Child care providerB. RelativesC. Spouse or partnerD. OtherE. does not apply (no children at home)”2010 CHRT 20 (CanLII)[336] This question does not address subsets such as children of pre-school age as opposed tochildren and teenagers still at home.[337] Also, when Dr. Moore-Ede used the numbers to extrapolate, he didn’t just extrapolatefrom those who said they used third party childcare providers, but from all respondents who hadchildren at home regardless of whether they had indicated care was provided by spouse, family,third parties or “other”. There is no indication that all parents would seek accommodationregardless of the age of their children and regardless of the childcare arrangements they havearranged.[338] Additionally, Dr. Moore-Ede had no overlay of data related to workers who work rotatingshifts, with their partners/spouses also working rotating shifts. Other provided evidence indicatesthis situation would only apply to 1.2% of the shift worker population.[339] Dr. Moore-Ede’s conclusions were premised on the belief that there would be a rippleeffect from accommodating Ms. Johnstone’s request driven by the dissatisfaction ofnon-accommodated workers being necessarily shoved into less desirable shifts and times.