Morsi v. Ontario (Finance), 2010 HRTO 21

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Hoda Morsi

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Finance, John Lucas, Barry Chan and Rick Steinbock

Respondents

-and-

Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Intervenor

interim DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: January 6, 2010

Citation: 2010 HRTO 21

Indexed as: Morsi v. Ontario (Finance)

1This is an Application filed on June 3, 2009 under section 53(5) of Part VI of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”). The applicant alleges that she was subject to discrimination in employment on the basis of age, sex creed, disability, ethnic origin and place of origin. She also alleges reprisal.

2This Interim Decision deals with a Request by the respondents to defer the further processing of this Application pending the conclusion of a number of grievances arising out of some or all of the same allegations which form the subject matter of this Application.

3In their Response, the respondents state this Application should be dismissed or deferred on a number of different bases. The respondents state that all of the issues raised in the Application have been raised in virtually identical language in other proceedings and that final decisions been made and releases executed. A large number of grievances have been consolidated and are proceeding before an arbitrator. OPSEU, the applicant’s bargaining agent has submitted that this Application should be deferred pending the outcome of 20 or more grievances ongoing before the Grievance Settlement Board dealing with the issues raised in the Application. OPSEU advised that the hearing is ongoing, there having been a date in November, 2009.

4The applicant opposes the dismissal or deferral of the Application.

5I am not satisfied based on the material filed that it would be appropriate to dismiss the Application. However, the Tribunal may defer consideration of an Application, on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of any party. The Tribunal will generally defer an Application where there is an ongoing grievance under a collective agreement based on the same facts and issues. However, the Tribunal must also consider, in light of the particular circumstances of each case, whether deferral is the most fair, just and expeditious way of proceeding with the Application.

6In my view, in light of the overlapping factual matters and the stage of the arbitration proceedings, the factors favoring deferral of this Application outweigh the factors favoring the Tribunal proceeding with the Application.

7Accordingly, the Tribunal will defer the Application. Where a party wishes to proceed with an application which has been deferred, the party must contact the Registrar-Transition no later than 60 days after the conclusion of the other proceeding.

8I am not seized.