John Maclean v. The Corporation of the City of St. Catharines, 2009 HRTO 90

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

John Maclean

Complainant

-and-

Ontario Human Rights Commission

Commission

-and-

The Corporation of the City of St. Catharines

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Kathleen Martin

Date: January 28, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 90

Indexed as: Maclean v. St. Catharines (City)

APPEARANCES

John Maclean, Complainant ) On his own behalf

Corporation of the City of St. Catharines, )

Respondent ) Denis Squires, Counsel

Ontario Human Rights Commission ) Bay Ryley, Counsel

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 150 ) Marie Boyd-Robinson

INTRODUCTION

1This is a complaint brought under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19 as amended (the "Code") by John Maclean alleging that the respondent infringed his right to equal treatment in employment because of his disability when he was terminated from his employment. The purpose of this Interim Decision is to confirm certain orders and directions made during a case management conference call held on January 26, 2009.

Removal of the Personal Respondents

2The complaint was originally filed against The Corporation of the City of St. Catharines as a corporate respondent and Gordon Campbell and Charges Finlay as personal respondents. Mr. Campbell was the complainant's immediate supervisor at the time of the complainant's dismissal and Mr. Finlay is described as a "foreman" employed by the corporate respondent at the time of the complainant's dismissal.

3On October 21, 2008, the respondents requested that the personal respondents be removed as parties. The Tribunal sought submissions on the issue. The Commission and complainant consent to the request.

4Having regard to the submissions of the parties and the material before me, I confirm my order that Gordon Campbell and Charles Finlay be removed as respondents in these proceedings and that the title of proceeding be amended accordingly.

Union's Request to Intervene

5On November 19, 2008, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 150, (the "Union") filed a Request for An Order During Proceedings (Form 5) seeking "intervenor status with full party rights in order to ensure that any resolution/adjudication of the complainant (sic) respects the interest of the entire bargaining unit to the greatest extent possible". The Union is the bargaining agent of various employees of the respondent including the complainant during the time he was employed with the respondent.

6During the conference call, the Union clarified that it was not seeking to call evidence or cross-examine witnesses and was content to limit its role to that of an observer in the hearing subject to having an opportunity to make submissions on remedy. None of the parties had any objection to the Union participating in the manner described.

7Having regard to the material before me and the submissions of the parties, I confirm my order that the Union is added to the complaint as a non-party intervenor. The Union is entitled to make submissions as to remedy and must focus its submissions on its perspective as the bargaining agent for its members employed with the respondent.

8The Registrar-Transition is directed to provide notice of any future hearing dates to the Union.

9In addition, the Commission is directed to provide a copy of its hearing brief to the Union and the parties are directed to copy the Union with any subsequent materials they file in this matter.

Additional Directions

10During the conference call, I also issued the following additional case management directions. I further indicated that directions would be confirmed in writing which I do below, subject to editing for clarity.

11The Tribunal directs as follows:

i. By February 10, 2009, the Commission and complainant shall identify what particular conduct outlined in their hearing brief is alleged to be in violation of the Code and why it is in violation of the Code. The respondents may provide any response by February 20, 2009.

ii. By February 10, 2009, the Commission and complainant shall serve on the other parties and file with the Tribunal any further documents that they intend to rely on at the hearing, including any medical documents. The respondent may provide any response by February 20, 2009, and in such response, will raise any objection to any medical documents submitted.

iii. By February 17, 2009, the Commission and complainant shall serve on the other parties and file with the Tribunal a detailed statement of the special damages claimed, including a year by year breakdown of the damages.