Escudero v. United Parcel Service, 2009 HRTO 811

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Carlos Escudero

Applicant

-and-

United Parcel Service

Respondent

decision

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: June 10, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 811

Indexed as: Escudero v. United Parcel Service

1This Decision deals with whether the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to deal with an Application filed under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the “Code”). The Application was filed on March 20, 2009 and alleges discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and age. The respondent submits that it is federally regulated and that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with the Application.

2The respondent asserts that it is subject to the Canadian Human Rights Act and that any human rights complaints should be directed to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) rather than the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO). The respondent notes that the CHRT website includes a link to a list of private sector employers under federal jurisdiction, compiled by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. The list includes United Parcel Services, the respondent.

3The applicant submits that the HRTO should deal with his Application even if the respondent is federally regulated. He points out that the respondent carries out business in Ontario and argues that the HRTO should have jurisdiction on that basis. The applicant submitted a list of various court and tribunal cases involving United Parcel Services. I note that these cases confirm that it is the CHRT that has jurisdiction over United Parcel Services and not the HRTO. The applicant included a HRTO decision, Shaikh v. United Parcel Service of Canada, 2008 HRTO 279, which concluded:

Pursuant to subsection 92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867, transportation works and undertakings that extend beyond the limits of a province are within federal jurisdiction. In United Parcel Service v. Thibodeau, 2005 FC 608, 2005 FC 608 at para. 4 the Federal Court noted that UPS is subject to the Canada Labour Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. L-2, which governs labour and employment relationships of federal undertakings. UPS states that it is a courier company whose core business is the transportation of goods across provincial boundaries and internationally. It notes that the Canadian Human Rights Commission has taken jurisdiction over complaints against UPS. There is no evidence before me to suggest the contrary.

It is apparent that the employment relationship between the applicant and respondent is not governed by the Code. Accordingly, the application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure.

4It is clear that the respondent is a federally regulated undertaking and that it is subject to the Canadian Human Rights Code and not the Ontario Human Rights Code. This Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with the Application and it must be dismissed on that basis.