HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Nafisa Mohamed Applicant
-and-
Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) Toronto Performers Respondents
Decision
Adjudicator: Dale Hewat Date: June 21, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 1390 Indexed as: Mohamed v. Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) Toronto Performers
APPEARANCES
Nafisa Mohamed, Applicant ) Michael Hassell, Counsel ACTRA Toronto, Respondent ) Jeffrey M. Andrew and Jo-Anne Pickel, Counsel
1This is an Application filed December 23, 2008 under section 53(3) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The Case Resolution Conference (“hearing”) was held November 24 and 25, 2009.
2The applicant, who self-identifies as an African-Canadian and East Indian Muslim female, alleges that she experienced discrimination on the basis of marital status, sex, colour, ethnic origin, creed and race and faced reprisals during her tenure as a member of the executive of the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists, ACTRA Toronto Extras Caucus (“the Extras Caucus”) now the Toronto Additional Background Committee. The allegations in the complaint originally filed with the Commission on June 5, 2006 begin in July 2005 and continue until March 2006 and relate to alleged incidents during the applicant’s participation in and removal from the Extras Caucus on March 16, 2006.
3The alleged discrimination between July 2005 and March 2006 consists of the following incidents:
- On July 5, 2005 the applicant attended her first ACTRA Toronto Council Meeting and claims that she heard the Vice-President of Member Services, Eric Murphy, say the words “chocolate mousse” and that other members mentioned the words “mating game”. The applicant alleges that these words were directed at her because she was one of two “women of colour” at the meeting. The applicant also interpreted the words “mating game” to be directed at her and constituted racial stereotyping.
- On August 18, 2005, while attending an Extras Caucus meeting the applicant alleges that 2 other female members, Ms. Ismay Pascal and Ms. Katherine Bignell, made inappropriate remarks about breasts that were directed at her and that such behavior and comments constituted discrimination on the basis of sex.
- On September 6, 2005 the applicant attended another ACTRA Toronto Council meeting and claims that she, being the only “woman of colour”, was not welcomed and made to feel uncomfortable by the members and in particular by Ms. Theresa Tova, Vice-President, Internal ACTRA Toronto.
- The applicant claims that during a telephone conversation on November 16, 2005 she was spoken to disrespectfully when she questioned Ms. Bignell about not receiving an agenda for the November 17, 2005 Extras Caucus meeting.
- The applicant claims that during the November 17, 2005 Extras Caucus meeting, she was not respected, felt that the members were hostile to her and was asked to leave the meeting because she was the only “woman of colour” in attendance. The applicant claims that she raised her concerns with ACTRA’s Diversity Committee to no avail.
- The applicant claims that at the December 6, 2005 ACTRA Toronto Council meeting inappropriate comments about “Eskimos”, vegetarianism and the word caucus were specifically targeted at her in a discriminatory manner. She also alleges Mr. Murphy announced that he was glad that he made the comment about the applicant in the July 5, 2005 Council meeting.
- The applicant claims again that she was spoken to in a discriminatory manner and was not taken seriously in the course of an email exchange on February 20, 2006 with Ms. Thompson, another Extras Caucus member.
- On March 16, 2006, before an Extras Caucus meeting, the applicant met with Ms. Tova and Mr. Dan Mckenzie, Manager, Communications & Organizing of ACTRA Toronto, who she claims ambushed her and did not take her concerns seriously despite the applicant’s email to Ms. Tova that day complaining of discriminatory conduct. The applicant was later removed as a member of the Extras Caucus by letter dated March 17, 2006 which she claims was in violation of the Code and a reprisal within the meaning of s.8 of the [Code](https://www.canlii.org/en/