The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal has heard the case of a Montreal Jewish hairdresser whom the province’s human rights commission earlier decided was discriminated against by his former Jewish employer for not allowing him to work on Friday nights and Saturdays, even though the business was open.
The hearing for Richard Zilberg took place for the better part of the day on March 27, despite the fact the defendant, his ex-employer Iris Gressy, did not show up.
The commission said it could not contact Gressy, who was principal owner of Spa OraZen on Queen Mary Road, which has since closed.
Zilberg’s dispute with Gressy goes back almost five years, when he was fired for, he alleged, talking with Jewish customers about his sense of unfairness about no longer being able to work on Shabbat. He had been at the spa for less than a year.
READ: PROFS COMPARE NAZI ERA CAMPUS CULTURE AND ANTI-ZIONISM IN CURRENT ACADEMIC CULTURE
He testified that he was told by the co-owners (Gressy had a partner at the time) in July 2012 that he could not work at that time anymore because he was Jewish. The owners, who were observant, did not come in themselves.
Zilberg, who says he is a proud Jew, but not shomer Shabbat, was shocked and angered, but complied to keep the job. The loss of the weekend hours was a hardship, because they are among the busiest, he said.
He was dismissed a month after the directive because, he says, he talked about it with clients. Zilberg said he had been told by the owners to just say that was his day off, if asked.
On Oct. 6, 2015, the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse upheld his complaint and recommended that Zilberg be compensated by the spa for material and moral damages totalling $20,000. It is believed to be the first time the commission ruled on, or possibly even heard, a dispute between parties of the same religion.
The spa did not pay the damages and did not co-operate with the commission’s investigation, despite a subpoena to testify. For that reason, the commission finally brought the case before the tribunal, which is a court. No date was announced on when a judgment will be handed down.
Zilberg has been helped to navigate the system throughout his long battle by the non-profit Centre for Research-Action on Race Relations (CRARR). He filed the complaint, with CRRAR’s help, at the commission in December 2012, claiming discrimination on the basis of his religion.
The commission brought two witnesses before the tribunal: another employee at the spa at the time and one of the clients Zilberg spoke to about the directive.
Zilberg says he was summarily dismissed – “put on the street,” is how he put it, without even his tools or client list, and warned he could not work at another salon within 6 kilometres, a so-called proximity clause adhered to in the beauty business.
Gressy told the media in 2015 that Zilberg’s schedule was cut because of a personality conflict with another employee and had nothing to do with his being Jewish.
Zilberg, a hairdresser for 34 years, now works at the Tessima salon in Décarie Square.
After the hearing, Zilberg told The CJN, “From the two witnesses, the truth came out. Everything was corroborated.”
Zilberg said he hesitated from the beginning to bring this matter to a public body for fear of giving the impression of a Jew fighting another Jew, but he was convinced he was clearly a victim of discrimination.
“This is not just about me. It’s for everybody who is discriminated against,” he said.
Nevertheless, his concern has been borne out over the past 1-½ years. Zilberg said he has been told by some in the Jewish community that he should not have done it, and that reaction has taken a psychological toll.
“There is a feeling that we should not do this to each other, that there are enough bad things said about Jews by others that we shouldn’t be giving people a reason to be anti-Semitic,” he said.
In some ways this reaction has been almost a difficult to endure as his treatment by his ex-employer, he said.
“But other people have given me their support. They understand that I had to stand up for my rights… I believe that anybody who feels that they have been discriminated against has an obligation, not only to themselves, but to all to come forward, otherwise it just festers.”
CRARR executive director Fo Niemi said, “The most disappointing and the most disturbing part of this hearing is the fact that the defendant never responded and didn’t show up.”
He thinks it may be months before the tribunal renders a decision, and then it would have to find Gressy and force her to pay, possibly by seizure of assets.
