HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Kathy Bertrand
Applicant
-and-
Greenboro Home Improvements Ltd.
Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Naomi Overend
Indexed as: Bertrand v. Greenboro Home Improvements
1This Interim Decision deals with the applicant’s Request for Order During Proceedings (Form 10) asking to amend her Application to add a further allegation and request ongoing relief. Her Application, filed February 10, 2009 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”) alleges that the respondent discriminated against her in employment on the basis of disability.
2The information provided in the Application (Form 1) is scant, but makes it clear that the applicant alleges she was off work for approximately two months related to an apparent disability. She indicates she was terminated two months after her return to work from the first leave. In the accompanying Form 1-A, the applicant alleges that she was terminated during a sick leave caused by a poisoned work environment.
3The amendment requested by applicant is as follows: “From the time of my return to work on July 7, 2009 the Respondent did not want me to return and I was treated differently than I had been treated prior to my medical leave.” This does not appear to be a substantive change, but merely an elaboration on what the applicant means with respect to the alleged poisoned work environment.
4The applicant also asks that she be allowed to amend her Application to include ongoing wage loss in the relief sought. As it stands now, the Application only specifies a global figure of $40,000 for all heads of monetary compensation.
5On their face, the proposed amendments are reasonable. Although there is a hearing scheduled in this matter, the hearing dates are not until April 2010. The respondent has not filed its hearing material at this point and would appear not to be prejudiced by either requested amendment. Moreover, the respondent has not filed a Response to the Request for Order (Form 11), or any other material suggesting its opposition to the applicant’s Request.
6Accordingly, this Application is amended to include: (1) the proposed wording concerning the allegation that she received differential treatment upon her return to work following a sick leave as an addendum to the applicant’s allegations; and (2) the request for ongoing wage loss as part of the relief being sought.
7I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 16th day of November, 2009.
“Signed By”
Naomi Overend
Vice-chair
2