HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

John-Phillip Russo

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Community Housing Corporation, HSI Solutions Inc. and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Judith Keene

Date: February 10, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 149

Indexed as: Russo v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation

INTRODUCTION

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”), on September 4, 2008. This Interim Decision deals with a Request for Order by the respondents to defer consideration of the Application pending the outcome of grievances.

BACKGROUND

2The applicant alleges that he was either dismissed or demoted over workplace harassment allegations made against him. The applicant has filed several grievances that are in progress.

3In his Reply to the respondents’ Request for Order, the applicant argues that a deferral should not be granted. He states that “a request to defer is inappropriate…as there are no issues at stake that will be addressed outside of the code, and there should be no preference to the body used to resolve the complaints”.

DECISION

4Pursuant to Rule 14.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, the Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of any party. The Tribunal will generally defer an application where there is an ongoing grievance under a collective agreement based on the same facts and issues. However, the Tribunal must also consider, in light of the particular circumstances of each case, whether deferral is the most fair, just and expeditious way of proceeding with the Application.

5I find, based on my review of copies of the filed grievances and other information provided by the applicant and respondents, that the facts and issues raised by this Application are related to grievances that are still in progress. While the applicant may not be satisfied with the respondents’ actions to date in response to his grievances, he does have the opportunity to have his grievances proceed to arbitration before an independent arbitrator with the authority to deal with his allegations.

6In these circumstances deferral is appropriate. The Tribunal orders the deferral of the Application pending the conclusion of the grievances.

7Where a party wishes to proceed with an application which has been deferred, the party must make a Request for an Order During Proceedings in accordance with Rule 19 within 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding (Rules 14.3 and 14.4).

I am not seized of this matter.