Whole foods can get fucked, but I don't think he can legally do that. As paradoxical as it sounds, whole foods has the freedom to express or not express opinions on remembrance day through their dress policies. Their employees do too, but not while they're on Whole Food's time, because they made an agreement to adhere to Whole Food's dress policy in exchange for money. Employees are legally allowed to violate that agreement and put a poppy on but if they do Whole Foods is under no obligation to uphold their end of that agreement and keep paying them (i.e. they can be fired).
It's actually the same logic by which Quebec has banned their provincial employees from wearing hijabs and other religious garb. You have the legal right to wear that shit if you want, but if you make a deal with an employer and you say "I agree to adhere to your dress policy (among other things) in exchange for wages", then you have to uphold your end of that bargain, otherwise they can stop paying you wages (by firing you for breach of contract).
I don't think he should, but I think he certainly can. It would probably be done using the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal legislation - which again, I think is bullshit and HRTs should be abolished. But as of now that is the precedent in Canada.
If HRTs can mandate the women in the workplace can't be forced to wear high heels but must be given the option to wear flats; that they can't be mandated to wear a skirt but must be given an option to wear pants; that Sikhs can't be mandated to be clean shaven; that Christians must be allowed to wear a small cross....... etc etc
HRTs can then certainly mandate something reasonable, like on all National Statuatory holidays and internationally recognized days of religious significance employees must be given an opportunity to show support of the holiday or not.
Again the definition would have to be reasonable. Wearing a poppy is reasonable. So is wearing a green shamrock for St. Pattys. Dressing up as a WWI soldier or a leprichon probably is not.
Whole foods can get fucked, but I don't think he can legally do that. As paradoxical as it sounds, whole foods has the freedom to express or not express opinions on remembrance day through their dress policies. Their employees do too, but not while they're on Whole Food's time, because they made an agreement to adhere to Whole Food's dress policy in exchange for money. Employees are legally allowed to violate that agreement and put a poppy on but if they do Whole Foods is under no obligation to uphold their end of that agreement and keep paying them (i.e. they can be fired).
It's actually the same logic by which Quebec has banned their provincial employees from wearing hijabs and other religious garb. You have the legal right to wear that shit if you want, but if you make a deal with an employer and you say "I agree to adhere to your dress policy (among other things) in exchange for wages", then you have to uphold your end of that bargain, otherwise they can stop paying you wages (by firing you for breach of contract).
I don't think he should, but I think he certainly can. It would probably be done using the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal legislation - which again, I think is bullshit and HRTs should be abolished. But as of now that is the precedent in Canada.
If HRTs can mandate the women in the workplace can't be forced to wear high heels but must be given the option to wear flats; that they can't be mandated to wear a skirt but must be given an option to wear pants; that Sikhs can't be mandated to be clean shaven; that Christians must be allowed to wear a small cross....... etc etc
HRTs can then certainly mandate something reasonable, like on all National Statuatory holidays and internationally recognized days of religious significance employees must be given an opportunity to show support of the holiday or not.
Again the definition would have to be reasonable. Wearing a poppy is reasonable. So is wearing a green shamrock for St. Pattys. Dressing up as a WWI soldier or a leprichon probably is not.