Marek Rokicki v. Schneider National Carriers Inc., 2010 HRTO 1983

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Marek Rokicki

Applicant

• and-

Schneider National Carriers Inc.

Respondent

Decision

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha

Date: September 28, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 1983

Indexed as: Rokicki v. Schneider National Carriers

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY

Marek Rokicki, Applicant ) Self-represented

ii

BACKGROUND

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended, (the “Code”) on August 16, 2010, alleging discrimination with respect to employment. The Application states that the applicant was employed as a truck driver and prior to his dismissal was driving in the United States for the respondent.

2On September 1, 2010, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss noting that the respondent may be a federally-regulated business outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The Tribunal invited the applicant to make written submissions within 30 days regarding the issue of jurisdiction.

3On September 23, 2010, the applicant filed submissions in response to the Tribunal’s Notice. The applicant indicates that it is not plain and obvious that the respondent is subject to federal jurisdiction.

DECISION

4The Code only applies to matters that fall within provincial jurisdiction and does not apply to federally-regulated businesses. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has the power to deal with human rights matters that fall under federal jurisdiction. Pursuant to subsection 92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867, transportation works and undertakings that extend beyond the limits of the province are within federal jurisdiction. See Soler v. Luckhart Transport, 2009 HRTO 1486 and Rowland v. Canada Cartage Systems, 2009 HRTO 1941.

5Based on the information contained in the Application and the accompanying documents, the respondent’s business is transportation between countries and the work performed by the applicant involved trucking outside of Ontario. In fact, the Application expressly states that the applicant was dismissed due to alleged misconduct while driving in the United States. Consequently, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to proceed. The applicant must bring his claim to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

6Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.