Tracey Fitzgerald v. City of Hamilton, Anne Kayler, Cathy Thompson and Pat Edwards, 2010 HRTO 1034

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Tracey Fitzgerald

Applicant

-and-

City of Hamilton, Anne Kayler, Cathy Thompson and Pat Edwards

Respondents

-and-

Canadian Union of Public Employees

Intervener

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Michelle Flaherty

Date: May 10, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 1034

Indexed as: Fitzgerald v. Hamilton (City)

1The applicant filed an Application under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the "Code") in which she alleges discrimination in the context of employment on the basis of creed.

2The respondents deny the allegations of discrimination and seek the deferral of the Application because of an ongoing grievance proceeding. The applicant has not filed a Reply and the time for doing so has elapsed.

3The applicant's union, the Canadian Union of Public Employees ("Union") has filed a Request to Intervene ("Request"). The respondent has indicated that it supports the Union's Request. The applicant has not filed a response to the Request and the time for doing so has elapsed.

UNION'S REQUEST TO INTERVENE

4The Tribunal indicated in Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 131 that:

A union or association nearly always has an interest in a human rights application brought by an employee in a bargaining unit it represents when the application alleges discrimination in employment. Absent exceptional circumstances, the applicant's bargaining agent will be granted intervention status in Tribunal proceedings where it requests it.

5I am satisfied that the Union has the requisite interest in this Application. The Union is granted leave to intervene. Should the Application proceed to a hearing, the scope of the Union's intervention will be determined by the adjudicator at the hearing.

REQUEST TO DEFER

7In the circumstances, it is appropriate that the Union have an opportunity to make submissions on the deferral issue.

8Within ten days of the date of this Interim Decision, the Union may serve on the parties and file with the Tribunal written submissions addressing whether the Application should be deferred in light of ongoing grievance proceedings.

9If the Union does not provide such submissions within ten days of the date of this Interim Decision, the Tribunal may decide the issue based on the materials already filed or may provide further direction.

10I am not seized of this matter.