Passmore v. P & H Foods, 2008 HRTO 154

Case Summary

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and requested an expedited proceeding based on an agreement to return her to work in a new department. The corporate respondent and the applicant's union opposed the request. The Tribunal found no basis to conclude the circumstances were urgent compared to the regular process and denied the request to expedite.

B E T W E E N:

Kathie Passmore

Applicant

-and-

P & H Foods, Kathy Johnstone and Karen Krauter

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Naomi Overend

Date: October 14, 2008

Citation: 2008 HRTO 154

Indexed as: Passmore v. P & H Foods

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario 655 Bay Street, 14th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2A3 Phone: (416) 326-1312 / 1-866-598-0322 Fax: (416) 326-2199 / 1-866-355-6099 TTY: (416) 314-2379 / 1-800-424-1168 E-mail: hrto.registrar@ontario.ca Website: www.hrto.ca

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY

Kathie Passmore, Applicant ) On her own behalf United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 175, ) Affected Party ) Marcia Barry, Counsel P & H Foods, Respondent ) Maureen Ball, Counsel

1The applicant filed an Application under Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability. At the same time, she also filed a Request to Expedite Proceedings (Form 14). This interim decision addresses the request to expedite.

2The expedited hearing process is available where the circumstances of an application "require an urgent resolution of the issues in dispute." [see Rule 21.1] Thus, when requesting an expedited proceeding, "the applicant must demonstrate that the circumstances are truly urgent, requiring the resolution of the human rights dispute in a particularly rapid manner as compared with the time required to complete the Tribunal's regular process." [see Weerawardane v. 2152458 Ontario Ltd., 2008 HRTO 53].

3The applicant's request for an expedited proceeding is based on an agreement to return her to work in a new department. The corporate respondent and the applicant's union both oppose the request. Having reviewed the materials filed by the applicant, the respondent and the UFCW, there is no basis for concluding that the circumstances in this matter are urgent as compared with the time required to complete the Tribunal's regular process. Accordingly, the applicant's request to expedite is denied. I am not seized of this matter.

Dated at Toronto, this 14th day of October, 2008.

"Signed by"

Naomi Overend Vice-Chair