Compelled Speech in Canada

[DBTrek]

No, you're the one who is confused, because your government only protects you from compelled testimony in court, it doesn't protect you from being compelled by your employer to speak, on pain of being fired.

O RLY?

Can't say it's an issue here because I've never been asked to sign a marxist oath of fealty to operate anywhere, but I find it unlikely that if my employer said "Renounce Christianity or be fired", or "Advocate for transgender rights to access both bathrooms" and I refused, they could fire me without repercussion.

I think "Fired for not making personal social or political declarations" is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

But maybe.
/shrug

As I said, since we don't play those bolshie shenanigans around here it has never come up.

[Smitty-48]

No, you're the one who is confused, because your government only protects you from compelled testimony in court, it doesn't protect you from being compelled by your employer to speak, on pain of being fired.

O RLY?

Can't say it's an issue here because I've never been asked to sign a marxist oath of fealty to operate anywhere, but I find it unlikely that if my employer said "Renounce Christianity or be fired", or "Advocate for transgender rights to access both bathrooms" and I refused, they could fire me without repercussion.

I think "Fired for not making personal social or political declarations" is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

But maybe.
/shrug

As I said, since we don't play those bolshie shenanigans around here it has never come up.

I'm not a member of the law society, so what the members of the law society vote as their rules of conduct has never come up for me neither, but by all means, go ahead and wet your pants about it, snowflake, knock yourself out. /shrugs

[DBTrek]

Don't rage at us because you got the WrongThink police down there jerking you around while ol' J. Trudeau grins and commands you to kneel. Ain't us that messing you up.

[DBTrek]

ABOUT THE LAW SOCIETY

Created by an act of the Legislative Assembly in 1797, the Law Society of Upper Canada governs Ontario’s lawyers and paralegals in the public interest by ensuring that the people of Ontario are served by lawyers and paralegals who meet high standards of learning, competence and professional conduct.

The Law Society has a duty to protect the public interest, to maintain and advance the cause of justice and the rule of law, to facilitate access to justice for the people of Ontario, and to act in a timely, open and efficient manner.

The Law Society regulates, licenses and disciplines Ontario’s more than 50,000 lawyers and over 8,000 licensed paralegals pursuant to the Law Society Act and the Law Society's rules, regulations and guidelines. . . .

https://www.lsuc.on.ca/with.aspx?id=905

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, very interesting.

It's not the government, eh?
No.
It's just a legislated body in charge of licensing, regulating, and disciplining all of Ontario's lawyers.
Big difference!
Kneel to the Marxism or you will never practice law in Ontario.


Lol-cakes at you snowflakes.

[Smitty-48]

Don't rage at us because you got the WrongThink police down there jerking you around while ol' J. Trudeau grins and commands you to kneel. Ain't us that messing you up.

You're the one raging, but since you're raging at a private self governing association, take it up with them, has nothing to do with the Prime Minister, the Law Society doesn't answer to the government, it only answers to its own members who vote on the rules of conduct therein, they make their own rules, it doesn't come down from on high in Ottawa.

[DBTrek]

You're the one raging, but since you're raging at a private self governing association, take it up with them, has nothing to do with the Prime Minister, the Law Society doesn't answer to the government, it only answers to its own members who vote on the rules of conduct therein, they make their own rules, it doesn't come down from on high in Ottawa.

They were created by an act of legislation to govern the licensing and discipline of all Ontario lawyers and paralegals.
Hardly a group of individuals that just got together to start their own club.

[SuburbanFarmer]

No, you're the one who is confused, because your government only protects you from compelled testimony in court, it doesn't protect you from being compelled by your employer to speak, on pain of being fired.

O RLY?

Can't say it's an issue here because I've never been asked to sign a marxist oath of fealty to operate anywhere, but I find it unlikely that if my employer said "Renounce Christianity or be fired", or "Advocate for transgender rights to access both bathrooms" and I refused, they could fire me without repercussion.

I think "Fired for not making personal social or political declarations" is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

But maybe.
/shrug

As I said, since we don't play those bolshie shenanigans around here it has never come up.

The case could be made that employment contracts containing mandatory arbitration clauses, ethics and behavior codes, social media agreements, and “at will” agreements would count.

Obviously, we don’t have any “compelled speech” in there, but that’s just a pen stroke away.

[DBTrek]

The case could be made to go fuck yourself, dude, while I'm taking the piss on Canada.

[Smitty-48]

You're the one raging, but since you're raging at a private self governing association, take it up with them, has nothing to do with the Prime Minister, the Law Society doesn't answer to the government, it only answers to its own members who vote on the rules of conduct therein, they make their own rules, it doesn't come down from on high in Ottawa.

They were created by an act of legislation to govern the licensing and discipline of all Ontario lawyers and paralegals.
Hardly a group of individuals that just got together to start their own club.

No, but none the less, legislated to be arms length from the Queen's Executive, in that, they retain freedom of association and the democratic means to vote for their own internal rules of conduct, with the Crown having nothing to say about it either way, the Crown intervening to determine the rules of their association for them, that would be unconstitutional, but them voting on their own internal rules, not actually.

[DBTrek]

No, but none the less, legislated to be arms length from the Queen's Executive, in that, they retain freedom of association and the democratic means to vote for their own internal rules of conduct, with the Crown having nothing to say about it either way, the Crown intervening to determine the rules of their association for them, that would be unconstitutional, but them voting on their own internal rules, not actually.

Can they vote to enslave people too?
Is there anything this organization can do to get the Crown to intervene?
Or are Canadian rights simply a matter of which legislated professional organizations you join?