Carmen Francis

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging disability discrimination and reprisal in employment.

The Tribunal held a preliminary summary hearing to determine whether the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success, delay, or because the matters were dealt with in other proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the application required a hearing on the merits to resolve factual disputes.

Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that prior WSIB and Ministry of Labour proceedings did not appropriately deal with the substance of the human rights allegations.

The application was allowed to proceed, and the parties were directed to mediation.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment after being terminated without cause.

The respondent requested dismissal on the basis that the applicant had signed a full and final release in exchange for a severance package.

The Tribunal applied the Pritchard factors and found that the applicant understood the release, received fair consideration, and did not sign under economic duress.

The application was dismissed as an abuse of process.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging employment discrimination based on race, colour, place of origin, ethnic origin, and creed.

Prior to a scheduled summary hearing, the applicant requested to withdraw the application.

The respondent requested that the withdrawal be granted only on a with prejudice basis, given the time and resources expended.

The applicant agreed to this condition but failed to attend the teleconference hearing.

The Tribunal granted the request to withdraw the application on a with prejudice basis, preventing the applicant from reviving the application or filing a new one regarding the same issues.

The employer and the union signed a pay equity plan in 2006 that tied the wages of female-dominated library job classes to male-dominated job classes in a separate municipal bargaining unit.

Subsequent interest arbitration awards for the municipal unit created a wage gap between the library employees and their comparators.

The employer argued that the pay equity plan capped retroactive adjustments and that any wage gap was permitted under the 'bargaining strength' exception in subsection 8(2) of the Pay Equity Act.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal held that the pay equity plan did not cap adjustments and that the employer failed to prove the wage gap resulted from differences in bargaining strength.

The employer was ordered to pay the corresponding percentage wage increases to the female job classes.