Norouzian v. Young Women’s Christian Association of Greater Toronto, 2011 HRTO 1369

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Bahareh Norouzian

Applicant

-and-

Young Women’s Christian Association of Greater Toronto

Respondent

-and-

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2189

Intervener

interim DECISION

Adjudicator: Judith Keene

Date: July 20, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1369

Indexed as: Norouzian v. Young Women’s Christian Association of Greater Toronto

1The applicant filed an Application, on May 19, 2010, 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 employment. A mediation did not result in resolution, and the Application is to be scheduled for a hearing.

2The purpose of this Interim Decision is to address a Request to Intervene (“Request”) filed by the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2189 (“ the Union”) on May 26, 2011. Neither party to this Application has responded to the Union’s Request and the time for doing so has elapsed.

3The Union takes no position on the allegations in the Application, and seeks to intervene in the Application only with respect to one of the remedies sought by the applicant. It is uncontested that the Union and the respondent are parties to a collective agreement, and that the applicant has requested that the Tribunal order her placed in a bargaining unit position. The respondent and the Union state objections to such an order. The Union states that the applicant is not a member of the Union, and disputes the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to make the order requested.

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.

5Given the remedy sought by the applicant, I am satisfied that the Union has the requisite interest in this Application and the Union is accordingly granted leave to intervene. The scope of the Union’s intervention may be determined by the adjudicator hearing the matter.

6I am not seized of this matter.