Workplace Safety and Insurance Law

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability against his employer and the WSIB, relating to the suitability of an accommodated position and loss of earnings benefits.

The respondents requested that the application be dismissed or deferred pending the outcome of ongoing WSIB appeals.

The Tribunal denied the employer's premature request for production of the WSIB file.

The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the human rights application, finding significant factual and legal overlap between the application and the concurrent WSIB proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability, related to an ongoing effort to have her job modified following a workplace injury.

The respondents requested that the application be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing that the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) had appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss because the WSIB proceedings were still ongoing.

However, the Tribunal granted the respondents' request to defer the application pending the outcome of the WSIB matter, as the subject matter and remedies substantially overlapped.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability, claiming the respondents failed to accommodate his workplace injuries and unfairly terminated his employment.

The respondents requested the application be dismissed or deferred because the applicant's WSIB claim regarding the same injuries was denied and an appeal was pending.

The Tribunal found significant factual overlap between the application and the concurrent WSIB proceeding, particularly regarding the alleged injury, medical restrictions, and cessation of employment.

The Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application pending the conclusion of the WSIB proceedings to avoid inconsistent decisions.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging failure to accommodate her work-related back injury and discriminatory termination.

The respondents sought to defer the application because the applicant had an ongoing claim before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) Appeals Resolution Officer regarding the same injury and return-to-work issues.

The Tribunal found a substantial overlap between the issues in the two proceedings, particularly regarding the nature of the disability and accommodation.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred until the WSIB Appeals Resolution Officer issues a final decision.

The applicant filed a human rights complaint alleging that the denial of his WSIB claim for chronic mental stress under s. 13(5) of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act was discriminatory on the basis of disability.

The Tribunal convened a three-member panel to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear a complaint alleging discrimination in the provision of statutory benefits.

The Tribunal concluded that benefits provided under a statute are 'services' within the meaning of the Human Rights Code.

While the Tribunal does not have the power to review the substantive correctness of WSIB decisions or act as an appellate body, it has jurisdiction to hear challenges alleging that the statutory scheme itself is discriminatory.

The Tribunal affirmed its jurisdiction and directed the parties to file detailed pleadings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging disability discrimination and constructive dismissal due to the employer's failure to accommodate her physical restrictions.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the application because the applicant was concurrently pursuing a WSIB appeal regarding the same factual issues.

The Tribunal found significant overlap between the factual allegations and legal issues in both proceedings and ordered the deferral of the human rights application pending the conclusion of the WSIB proceedings.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging failure to accommodate a work-related repetitive strain injury.

The respondents requested that the application be deferred because the applicant had concurrent proceedings before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) regarding the same issues.

The Tribunal found that the WSIB has the authority to consider the accommodation issues and that proceeding concurrently would risk inconsistent findings and be unfair to the parties.

The Tribunal ordered the application deferred pending the completion of the WSIB process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging the WSIB failed to accommodate her disability regarding her labour market re-entry plan.

The WSIB requested that the application be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or deferred pending the outcome of internal WSIB and WSIAT appeals.

The applicant agreed to the deferral.

The Tribunal deferred the application until the completion of the WSIB and WSIAT appeal processes, noting that those bodies have jurisdiction to address the human rights issues raised.

The respondents requested that the Tribunal defer the human rights application on the basis that the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) had exclusive jurisdiction over the issues.

The applicant opposed the deferral, noting that the WSIB claim had been closed since August 2010.

The Tribunal found no basis to defer the application because the WSIB process had concluded and there was no active proceeding or appeal.

The respondents' request to defer was denied.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in services and reprisal by his employer and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) regarding his return to work and accommodation of his disability.

The WSIB requested an order to dismiss the application, arguing the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to review its adjudicative decisions.

The Tribunal denied the request to dismiss at this preliminary stage, finding it was not clear that the allegations related solely to the WSIB's adjudicative function, and allowed the application to proceed in the normal course.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming he was dismissed for abandoning his employment after his driver's license was revoked due to a previous workplace injury.

The respondent requested that the application be deferred because the applicant was appealing a WSIB decision dealing with the same facts and circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the WSIB appeal dealt with similar allegations and issues, including the reasons for dismissal and entitlement to loss of earnings compensation.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the WSIB appeal.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability regarding the WSIB's labour market re-entry services.

The respondent requested that the application be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or deferred pending the outcome of ongoing WSIB proceedings.

The Tribunal found it was not plain and obvious that it lacked jurisdiction and declined to dismiss the application at a preliminary stage.

On consent of the parties, the Tribunal ordered the application deferred pending the conclusion of the WSIB and WSIAT proceedings.

The applicant requested that his human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability be deferred pending the completion of his appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The Tribunal found that the suitability of modified work and the obligation to accommodate were central to both proceedings, and that the WSIAT's determination regarding Loss of Earnings benefits could affect potential damages.

The Tribunal granted the request and deferred the application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of age and disability regarding the reduction of his non-economic loss benefits under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

The respondent argued the application was barred by section 2.1 of the Act.

The Tribunal directed the applicant to file a Notice of Constitutional Question if he intended to challenge the legislation's validity.

Despite multiple extensions, the applicant failed to comply with the Tribunal's directions.

Consequently, the application was dismissed as abandoned.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) discriminated against her on the basis of age when it denied her claim for benefits.

The WSIB Appeals Resolution Officer had concluded that the applicant's shoulder condition was likely related to age-related tendon degeneration rather than a workplace injury.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss and directed submissions on whether it had the power to deal with the claim.

Applying section 2.1(1) of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, which exempts age-based distinctions made under the Act from the Human Rights Code, the Tribunal found it could not conclude that the WSIB's decision was discriminatory under the Code.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, claiming her disability was a factor in her termination.

The respondent denied the allegations and requested the application be deferred pending the outcome of a related WSIB claim.

The Tribunal noted it may defer an application if there is an ongoing proceeding based on the same facts, or dismiss it under section 45.1 if the WSIB has already dealt with the substance.

As the status of the WSIB matter was unclear, the Tribunal directed the applicant to file written submissions and documentation regarding the WSIB claim's status.

The respondent requested that the human rights application be deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's WSIB claim.

The applicant objected, stating they are two different issues.

The Tribunal found that there is an overlap between the issues raised in the two proceedings, particularly regarding the nature of the applicant's claimed disability and potential compensation for lost income.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and inconsistent decisions, the Tribunal deferred the application until the WSIB Appeals Branch deals with the applicant's objections.

The respondent requested that the human rights application alleging employment discrimination be deferred pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT).

The Tribunal found that the WSIAT appeal arose from the same factual basis as the human rights application.

To avoid concurrent proceedings and the potential for inconsistent findings, the Tribunal deferred the application until the conclusion of the WSIAT appeal process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability after his employment was terminated.

The employer terminated him based on WSIB surveillance video that allegedly showed him misrepresenting his workplace injury.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the application pending the resolution of the applicant's related WSIB appeal.

The Tribunal found that the issues in the application and the WSIA appeal significantly overlapped, and deferred the application to avoid the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination after being denied mental stress benefits by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).

The WSIB brought a request for an order during proceedings, arguing the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to review the adjudicative functions of another statutory tribunal.

Noting conflicting jurisprudence on this issue, the Interim Chair exercised his power under s. 33 of the Human Rights Code to appoint a three-member panel to decide the jurisdictional question and directed the scheduling of an oral hearing.