Greg Bullen

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and gender identity following her termination from employment and the denial of ongoing WSIB benefits.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing to address whether the application should be dismissed for delay and whether it had a reasonable prospect of success against the WSIB.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide a good faith explanation for filing her application almost two years after her termination.

Furthermore, the Tribunal determined it lacked jurisdiction to review the WSIB's decision to deny benefits.

The application was dismissed in its entirety.

The respondent requested to defer the human rights application pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

The applicant alleged discrimination based on disability and age regarding the reduction of a meal allowance and the failure to convert his paper file to electronic form.

The Tribunal dismissed the deferral request, finding that it would not be fair, just, and expeditious to defer, as the Tribunal was the better forum to adjudicate the accommodation issue and the age discrimination issue was not before the WSIB.

The applicant filed an application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code alleging discrimination in employment against her employer and union.

The employer added the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) as a respondent.

The WSIB filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to be removed as a party, noting there were no allegations against it in the application or response.

The applicant consented to the removal, and the employer provided no submissions.

The Tribunal granted the request and removed the WSIB as a respondent.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of disability.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer because there were ongoing grievance proceedings before the Grievance Settlement Board related to the same issues and events.

The respondents supported deferral, and the applicant did not file submissions.

The Tribunal deferred the application pending the conclusion of the grievance proceeding, noting that arbitrators have the power and responsibility to deal with the Code in relation to grievances.

The applicant, who receives benefits from the respondent, alleged discrimination on the basis of disability and age regarding the reduction of his meal allowance and the failure to convert his paper file to electronic form.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing on its own initiative to determine if the application had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal concluded that the issues raised required evidence to be heard and could not be dismissed at this early stage.

The application was permitted to proceed to the next stage in the hearing process.

The applicant filed human rights applications against his employer, his union, a union representative, and the WSIB, alleging discrimination based on disability.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine whether the application against the union and its representative should be dismissed under s. 45.1 of the Code, as the applicant had previously filed an unsuccessful duty of fair representation complaint with the OLRB based on the same facts.

The Tribunal found that the OLRB proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the human rights allegations and dismissed the application against the union respondents.

The Tribunal also dismissed the application against the WSIB, finding it had no reasonable prospect of success as it merely challenged a benefits decision without raising a valid Code violation.

The applicant requested to bifurcate the hearing to deal first with the liability of the WSIB and its return to work specialist, and subsequently with the employer's liability.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding no compelling reason to depart from the general practice of hearing all evidence concerning the single return to work meeting at the same time.

The Tribunal also granted the respondents' request for an additional hearing date to accommodate a witness who relocated out of the country.

The applicant alleged discrimination in employment based on the respondent's failure to appropriately accommodate his disability arising from a 2001 workplace injury.

After being placed in a permanent position that proved beyond his functional limitations, the applicant claimed he was forced to retire, amounting to constructive dismissal.

The Tribunal found that the respondent fulfilled both the procedural and substantive components of its duty to accommodate by conducting extensive job searches and offering a suitable alternative position, which the applicant refused for strategic reasons.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment regarding retirement benefits.

The respondents argued the application was filed outside the one-year limitation period under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant claimed he only discovered the discriminatory treatment months after his retirement was finalized.

The Tribunal found that the discovery of new evidence did not establish good faith for the delay, and that the continuing effects of the alleged discrimination did not constitute a continuing contravention.

The application was dismissed as out of time.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination and reprisal more than five years after his termination.

The respondents sought dismissal of the application due to delay.

The applicant argued the delay was justified because he was pursuing a union grievance and an OLRB complaint, and mistakenly believed he could not pursue a human rights application simultaneously.

The Tribunal found that ignorance of the law is not an excuse and the applicant failed to make appropriate inquiries.

The Tribunal concluded the delay was not incurred in good faith and dismissed the application.