StoneMtn

Aaaaaah yes. Bo Diddley.

If not for you, how could the 1980s punk rock band, "Bo" ever have existed? A band that only played hardcore-punk-Bo-Diddley covers would have been a bit irrelevant had Bo Diddley never been around.

People will. He plays to the right demographic.

I noticed that a woman named Catherine Russell is playing at this. Her voice is unreal. She's a soul/jazz singer. (Her "regular" gig is on SNL, actually.)

Everyone should see her, if possible.

This is really odd. I was just mowing my lawn, and a neighbour introduced himself. Among other things, he mentioned that his son is the drummer of a band called "Revolver" and the lead singer is from Slik Toxic.

I then came in here, and opened this thread, like 10 minutes later.

Should I tell my neighbour his son is featured at "Nudefest"?

I actually didn't read the original judgment for those facts, until I saw your question. I'll just set out the facts verbatim here, but I now see something else interesting. The Human Rights Tribunal actually did find that there would have been a case for this guy, if he had been addicted to marijuana. Unfortunately for him, he was not.

Facts

3 KBR is a construction company working in the Fort McMurray area of Alberta and elsewhere. In the summer of 2002, it assisted Syncrude Canada Ltd. ("Syncrude") in its plant expansion in the Fort McMurray area. The project was massive. Several thousand workers worked at the site; many involved in the plant expansion, and others carrying out Syncrude's existing production of synthetic crude oil from oil sand. Several different companies were engaged for the expansion and much of the work involved integrating workers from various corporate entities. The work site was a literal anthill of activity, where construction at many levels was integrated with production at many levels. Some of the largest industrial equipment on the planet was in use and the accident risk was high. Consequences of accidents could impact workers, the plant and the environment.

4 At the time, KBR's hiring policy required all persons seeking non-unionized positions at KBR to take and pass a 'post-offer/pre-employment' drug test before they would be hired. If the prospective employee failed the test, he or she would not be hired; however, the policy also provided that prospective employees would be eligible for consideration six months after the date of the failed test. KBR's policy applies to all employees and contractors. Its intent is stated upfront:

... [T]o prohibit impairment from the use of alcohol, controlled or prohibited substances by Company Employees or Contractors while they are engaged in Company activities, and to prohibit the possession and sale of prohibited and controlled substances. Prohibition from impairment is enforced through testing. As the use of alcohol or prohibited or controlled substances may adversely affect the ability of a person to work in a safe manner, the presence of them in the body is prohibited as set out in this Policy. ... [E134]

5 On June 24, 2002, a recruiting specialist with KBR, Leanne Aysan, contacted Chiasson regarding a position with KBR as a receiving inspector at the Syncrude UE-1 expansion project in Fort McMurray. On June 25, 2002, Gary Fowler, Quality Assurance Manager with KBR, conducted a telephone interview with Chiasson. According to Chiasson's human rights complaint and his testimony (p. 42), Aysan informed him later that day of the requirement that he take and pass a pre-employment medical and drug test. By letter dated June 26, 2002, KBR offered Chiasson the position for a fixed term of 21 months beginning July 8, 2002, subject to the "results from [his] pre-employment medical and drug screen". Attached to that letter were terms and conditions of employment, including:

1. Compliance with the Halliburton KBR policies and procedures which may be reasonably amended from time to time.

2. Successful completion of the Company pre-employment medical and drug screen.

6 Chiasson took the pre-employment drug test on June 28, 2002 and started working for KBR on July 8, 2002. Chiasson had smoked marijuana on June 22, 2002, but did not tell anyone at KBR that he had done so and did not ask that the test be delayed to a later date, assuming the marijuana would have cleared his system by June 28, 2002.

7 On July 17, 2002, KBR received the test results and its medical director informed Chiasson that he had failed the test. Chiasson then admitted to using marijuana five days before his test. On the same day, Chiasson sought advice from Aysan, who told him to leave the work site and fly to Calgary the next day to "sign some papers". On arrival in Calgary, Chiasson met with Aysan and Doug Dickie, KBR's administrative manager, who advised Chiasson that his employment was terminated because he failed the pre-employment drug test. Dickie also stated that drug use was not allowed on the work site.

8 On October 22, 2002 Chiasson filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission ("HRCC"), alleging discrimination in employment practices on the grounds of physical and mental disability, contrary to s. 7(1) of the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. H-14 (the Act). Chiasson was supported and joined in his submission by the Director of the HRCC (the "Director").

9 Chiasson's complaint, at pp E209- E212 of the appeal book, is specific in nature in that it complains about his treatment by KBR. The basis of his complaint appears to be twofold: 1) he alleges that KBR as a subcontractor was not required to apply the pre-employment medical and drug tests; and 2) he claims that a subsequent denial of employment with a different employer was based on his KBR drug test results, which he understood to be private and confidential. The former allegation constitutes the only general reference to the KBR policy. There is nothing in Chiasson's complaint suggesting it is a claim of discrimination on behalf of anyone other than himself.

10 At the human rights hearing, Chiasson testified that he was a recreational user of marijuana and that he was not addicted to it. All witnesses for KBR who had dealings with Chiasson, and who testified at the hearing, stated that they did not consider Chiasson to be addicted to marijuana.

Human Rights Panel Decision

11 The Human Rights Panel, chaired by HColonel (Ret'd) Delano W. Tolley, issued its decision on June 7, 2005. The panel analysed the following four issues:

1) Did the complainant suffer from real physical and mental disabilities with regard to this situation as stated in the complaint and as defined by appropriate legislation;

2) Was there a "perceived disability" on the part of the respondent;

3) Was the complainant subject to discrimination on the part of the respondent; and

4) The appropriate remedy, if any, that should be applied.

It also reviewed the evidence presented by the Director, on behalf of both the Commission and Chiasson, together with the evidence of witnesses for KBR. It then dealt with each of the four issues.

12 Based on Chiasson's uncontradicted testimony that he was not addicted to cannabis and was only an occasional, recreational user, the panel held that no actual disability due to drug addiction was demonstrated. It concluded that because Chiasson was employed in a safety sensitive position at a hazardous work site, there was also no perceived disability. The evident logic being that if KBR had perceived disability on the part of Chiasson, it would not have assigned him to that type of work.

13 The panel then concluded that drug testing was prima facie discriminatory with respect to addicted persons. It also determined that had Chiasson demonstrated an actual or perceived disability, KBR's drug testing policy would have failed to totally accommodate, as required by the third part in the three-part test articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in British Columbia...

To me, this is an interesting case that was just denied leave to be heard at the Supreme Court of Canada level. The following is a summary, but in a nutshell it means that if your employer forces you to undergo a drug test, and then fires you due to the results of those tests, you do not have grounds to make a human rights complaint. The Supreme Court of Canada does not even believe that the matter warrants an appeal to the country's highest court, so it's over.

Interesting.

EMPLOYMENT LAW: DRUG TESTS

The Respondent company KBR's hiring policy required all persons seeking non-unionized positions at KBR to take and pass a "post-offer/pre-employment" drug test before they would be hired.

Mr. Chiasson, a recreational marijuana user, was terminated shortly after he began work with KRB because of a positive result in a pre-employment drug test. Mr. Chiasson filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, alleging discrimination in employment practices on the grounds of physical and mental disability, contrary to s. 7(1) of the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act , which dismissed the complaint.

The chambers judge allowed the appeal. The C.A. allowed the appeal and restored the decision of the Human Rights Panel.

Director of the Alberta Human Rights and Citzenship Commission, et al. v. Kellogg Brown & Root (Canada) Company (Alta. C.A., December 28, 2007)(32505) "with costs."

In fairness, my meal or drinks have only been dropped on my lap a couple of times (out of hundreds of times eating there).

The service, though, generally sucks. You were lucky, Mammoth.

The one place you have to eat is called "Baru". It's Peruvian food, and located in Dunbar. (Dunbar is not far from UBC.)

The restaurant referred to above is actually called The Naam (which means The Meeting Place, from back in the days that 4th Avenue was called Rainbow Road, and was full of hippies. It has good food, but plan to be there for hours before you're served, and don't be surprised if your meal is accidentally dumped in your lap when they first try to serve you. It's all part of the charm.)

Baru is really the "must-eat" place, though. Hidden gem; for sure.

We have a client, who is asking us to deal with a will of her father who died. One term of the will is that he insists that his former residence be "donated to the government, specifically for the purpose of being made into a half-way house for violent offenders".

Telephone to client...

"Why would your dad want this?"

"Oh. He really, really hated his neighbours."

It's my last name translated into English.

I can't say I've ever heard B and D, actually.

I love ZZ Top; especially live. The last chance I had to see them has to have been more than 15 years ago in Ottawa, and I always swore I'd see them again the next chance I got.

Now, I see they are coming to Toronto, but it's a show with "Brooks and Dunn" These guys are apparently the undisputed "Kings of linedancing".

Okay, so I need to know... Is this going to be a double-bill, or is ZZ Top actually on stage with these guys? If it's a double-bill, I'd probably go and just try to miss the B and D set, but I cannot find any write-up online about this, so I am left with a fear that it will really be ZZ Top backing up Brooks and Dunn on stage.

Help! Someone tell me it ain't so!

This is a very cool, well-written story about a group of Yeshiva students, planning a 9/11-type attack in New York. Huge improvement over Papernick's first book (of short stories). The ending was amazing.

Must-read.

www.jonpapernick.com

Phew!

On my walk to the bikeshop to see if they had thwe serial number I found it! The bastards tried to cut through my mondo lock and gave up, tossing the bike (manly basket and all) over a fence by the Queensway. With the help of my neighbor I hopped the fence (made me feel fifteen again) and we retrieved it. Seems like there is no damage aside from them trying to get through the lock, but even that doesn't need replacing!!!

You are correct. I gave up on cutting through the stupid lock, so I ditched the stupid bike.

Glad to hear it made it back to you.

No. When are they playing?

Of course, you're welcome to crash here, too, if you like.

That thing I told you about never ended up happening. There's other possible reasons I could end up in Ottawa, but nothing I immediately foresee.

I'm very impressed. That's awesome.

See you there, Hart; finally.

I'm looking into making plans for this soon. I can't believe this lineup is happening in Courtenay.

WTF?

Baka Beyond? Bela Fleck? Earl Scruggs? Morgan Davis? TAJ MAHAL???...

In Courtenay?

In.

Great band. Great bunch of guys.

They're ending their North American tour tonight at the ElMo.

You should be there.

You can sample them on myspace, and they have a website too. Just google them.

I think the most apparent reason it would be difficult for the FCC to catch your brother is that he is in Canada, and the FCC has no jurisdiction in this country.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why a Little BC Town Wants to Banish Cell Phones

New Denver's cells pitch: Relax, ring free.

View full article and comments here http:///News/2008/03/13/NewDenver/

By Bill Metcalfe

Published: March 13, 2008

TheTyee.ca

Looking for a nice quiet place to get away and unwind? The Village of New Denver in eastern British Columbia wants to make an unusual sales pitch:

Come, stay, and never hear the ring of a cell phone.

New Denver's citizens voted against the introduction of mobile phone service in a referendum in January. The vote was a close one -- 117 to 110 -- but the village council said before the referendum that it would live by the result. And it wants Telus to do the same.

New Denver (population about 600) is located in the Slocan Valley north of Nelson.

The issue has been passionately debated in the streets of New Denver and in the pages of the bi-weekly Valley Voice over the past few months. There are three reasons for the opposition: some citizens say radiation emitted by cellphone technology is a health hazard; others want to market the area to tourists and new residents as a tranquil cell-free sanctuary; and still others are just angry at Telus for what they see as its unwillingness to follow the community's wishes.

Proponents and opponents of cellphone service both claim to be in the majority.

Peace and quiet

"A cell phone-free zone would be competitive advantage in marketing the area as a tourist destination and as a place to live," says Bill Roberts, the chair of the Slocan Valley Economic Development Commission of the Regional District of Central Kootenay.

"The insidious part of cellphones," says Roberts, "is that they tether you to the office. A lot of people want to get away from that. And the fact that we're without cell phone service means that we're able to enjoy life without the incessant sound of ring tones, immediately followed by someone's shouted conversation."

The development commission and the Slocan Lake Chamber of Commerce are allied with the Village of New Denver in their opposition to the introduction of cell phone service.

'The pressure's off'

"Some people think we are just Luddites," says Roberts. "But I've seen the wired world. I'm a retired foreign affairs officer. And I was involved in getting high-speed wireless Internet to this valley." Roberts admits to owning a cell phone, which he uses when he travels outside the New Denver area.

The website of the Slocan Lake Chamber of Commerce opens with a lovely photo of the lake ringed by the Selkirk Mountains, and the words, "The pressure's off. You're in the Slocan Valley, beyond cell phone service. Breathe deep, walk tall, skip stones, then paddle home. Come unwind with us . . ."

"We're just trying to leverage our best local resource," says Roberts. He likens cell phones to other tranquility-busting technology such as motor boats and off-road vehicles.

"Unspoiled nature does not exist on Christina Lake or on Osoyoos Lake," he says, "and we don't want to become like them."

The health argument

In September 2007, the Valhalla Committee for Environmental Health, a subgroup of the Valhalla Wilderness Society, submitted a 611-page scientific report about cellphone hazards to the New Denver Village Council. The BioInitiative Report was published recently by the University of Albany, New York, and claims to be the most comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and independent scientific study of electromagnetic health risks in existence. (An interview with one of the authors of the report can be watched here.)

"That report brings together extensive findings by medical doctors and research scientists from the U.S., Sweden, Denmark, Austria, China and the U.K.," says Richard Caniell, the chair of the Valhalla Environmental Health Committee. "It corroborates the concern about health hazards expressed by villagers here."

Telus wants to place its transmitter on an existing tower already being used by the CBC at the edge of Centennial Park in New Denver. Telus has so far been unreceptive to the idea of moving it outside the municipal boundary, according to Julia Greenlaw of the Healthy Housing Society, another group that opposes the cellphone tower.

"Telus has been very bullheaded about this," she says. "Their cell phone service will only reach 3-5 kilometres up and down the lake anyway, so it doesn't make sense."

Opponents 'misinformed': Telus

Caniell has circulated two information pamphlets throughout New Denver, outlining his group's case against the tower, mostly based on the BioInitiative Report. The pamphlet says that governments around the world are beginning to question the safely of wireless technology and it quotes the report: "There is enough evidence of increased risk of brain tumours to warrant intervention with respect to their use . . . good public policy requires preventive action." The report is quoted as expressing particular concern about the health of children.

Caniell says his group went door to door with the pamphlet, and many people refused to read it. "They said, 'I like my cell phone, and I don't want to read that.'"

Shawn Hall of Telus told The Tyee that the company stopped construction for a while in 2007 when it heard of the opposition. Telus representatives attended a public meeting and "engaged in ongoing dialogue with everyone. We have had a lot of support in the community."

Hall champions the need for cell phone service in New Denver and calls opponents "well-intentioned but misinformed."

"We listen to Health Canada and Industry Canada," says Hall. "It's their life's work to protect Canadians' health. They have some of the world's leading experts on radio transmission. They have set levels on what they have determined is safe. Our signal will be thousands of times lower than that level."

Mixed signals?

The BioInitiative Report, as quoted by the Valhalla Society, says something quite different: "The existing public safety standards limiting radiation levels in nearly every country of the world look to be thousands of times too lenient. Changes are needed."

The problem is that the Valhalla Society and Telus are talking about two different kinds of electromagnetic signals. Health Canada's standards are based on high-intensity or thermal effects. According to that standard, Hall is probably right when he states that "the signals from the CBC and the local public works crew are the same as ours would be."

But the Valhalla Society says the concerns expressed by the authors of the BioInitiative Report are about low-level or non-thermal effects, which threaten health at levels much lower than those Health Canada says are safe.

Greenlaw wants to see the studies Telus and Health Canada are relying on, and she wants them to at least comment on the BioInitiative Report. "They keep telling us there are all these studies that prove their case, but they never bring them forward and they won't respond to the ones we have brought forward."

Telus's special status

If Telus really wants to locate its signal in New Denver, there appears to be nothing anyone can do about it. That's the third reason for some of the opposition.

"The telecommunications companies have a very effective lobby," says New Denver Mayor Gary Wright. "They are the only industry that is guaranteed universal access to any location anywhere they want, in order to make their for-profit services available to anyone. Churches can't do that, hospitals can't, you can't build a gas station or grocery store wherever you want, but telecom companies can do that. I don't think Telus has abused that special status. The location they have chosen is cheaper for them and as far away as you can be within village limits. But that's not to say it's right."

Telus's Shawn Hall, when asked by The Tyee about this apparent special status for Telus, replied that the municipal government does have local control because Telus had to apply for a building permit to install the tower.

"But a municipality cannot refuse to grant a permit to a telecommunications company," says Wright.

Village asked feds to intervene

Telecommunications are regulated by Industry Canada, an agency of the Federal Government.

In the past five years, the Union of B.C. Municipalities has twice asked the provincial government to help them gain some control over the location of telecommunications towers, citing citizen concerns about health effects, property values, and self-determination. In both cases the provincial government simply replied that it does not have jurisdiction.

In the meantime, Industry Canada has developed some guidelines for public consultation (outlined here). The guidelines include an unspecified alternate dispute resolution process if discussions fail.

The Village of New Denver has formally asked Industry Canada to intervene on its behalf in its dispute with Telus.

Industry Canada will mull tower

Morris Bodnar is Industry Canada's director for B.C. and the Yukon. He told The Tyee that his office has received the Village of New Denver's written submission, and that staff in his office will evaluate it and consider whether the tower site is appropriate.

Asked how "appropriate" may be defined or what the criteria might be, Bodnar said it was too early to comment and that "we will have to look at what is brought forward." Asked about how the opposition of the New Denver Council and Chamber of Commerce might affect the outcome, Bodnar said those things will be taken into consideration.

The policy contains many references to public consultation, discussion, and mutual interests. Bodnar says Industry Canada expects the same approach from providers such as Telus. "We want to know that the company has consulted with a community and that all relevant concerns are addressed. That is part of the conditions attached to their licence, and that will be part of our review."

Asked whether health effects or the desire for a cellphone free zone as a tourist attraction would be considered "relevant concerns," Bodnar said those things will be taken into consideration.

Asked whether Telus's active advocacy of the need for cellphone service in New Denver constitutes consultation or the opposite of consultation, Bodnar said he could not comment without more information.

Mayor Wright thinks Industry Canada will rule in favour of Telus. "They cannot afford to make a decision that would allow municipal governments to control what happens within their own borders."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does that imply that if a person puts her image in a newspaper' date=' hoping that people will like it, then it isn't mean for people to make fun of her appearance? Or are you simply saying that it is mean of those people, but she is asking for it, so the mean people are behaving morally?

[/quote']

Are you implying that she DOESN'T sport a spooky looking texture? Or that the eye makeups ISN'T overdone? yipes.

Neither, actually. I didn't address that, nor would I.

What in my post gave you that impression?

That never stopped me.

How does a conversation like that even get started at work?

(That's pretty funny, though, especially completely out of context.)