Ruling (.pdf) - International Center for Law and Religion Studies

performance of the job without endangering the employee, hisfellow employees and the general public. (at p. 208)[173] In Brossard, supra, Mr. Justice Beetz expanded on the second, objectivebranch of the Etobicoke test. He stated that in considering whether the qualificationwas “reasonably necessary”, it was appropriate to ask two questions (at para. 69):(1) Is the aptitude or qualification rationally connected to theemployment concerned? This allows us to determine whether theemployer's purpose in establishing the requirement is appropriatein an objective sense to the job in question. In Etobicoke, forexample, physical strength evaluated as a function of age wasrationally connected to the work of being a fireman.2008 HRTO 22 (CanLII)(2) Is the rule properly designed to ensure that the aptitude orqualification is met without placing an undue burden on those towhom the rule applies? This allows us to inquire as to thereasonableness of the means the employer chooses to test forthe presence of the requirement for the employment in question.The sixty-year mandatory requirement age in Etobicoke wasdisproportionately stringent, for example, in respect of itsobjective which was to ensure that all firemen have the necessaryphysical strength for the job.[174] In Caldwell, supra, where the issue was whether the requirement that a teacherbe in strict conformity with the tenets of the Roman Catholic faith, the Court describedthe objective branch of the test this way:In addressing the second branch of the test however, it wasargued that the requirement of religious conformance was notreasonably necessary to assure the efficient performance of theteaching function in any objective sense. Considerations ofeconomy and safety are not involved. However, the essence ofthe test remains applicable and may be phrased in this way: "Isthe requirement of religious conformance by Catholic teachers,objectively viewed, reasonably necessary to assure theaccomplishment of the objectives of the Church in operating aCatholic school with its distinct characteristics for the purposesof providing a Catholic education to its students?” (para. 33,emphasis added)[175] Finally, in Meiorin, supra, at paragraphs 57 and 59 the Court explains the firstelement in the unified approach:51