McFarlane v. Peel Halton Dufferin Acquired Brain Injury Services, 2011 HRTO 1862

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Janet McFarlane

Applicant

-and-

Peel Halton Dufferin Acquired Brain Injury Services and Alfred McMullan

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: October 13, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 1862

Indexed as: McFarlane v. Peel Halton Dufferin Acquired Brain Injury Services

1This is an Application filed on April 11, 2011 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”). This Interim Decision deals with the issue of whether the Application should be deferred pending the completion of a related grievance proceeding.

2The applicant indicates in the Application that the facts of the Application are part of a union grievance proceeding that is still in progress. The respondents confirm this and have attached a copy of the grievances filed with the Response. The Response asks the Tribunal to dismiss the Application in part because of delay in respect of some of the allegations and to defer further consideration of the Application until the grievance process has been completed.

3The applicant has not filed a Reply to the Response and the time for doing so has now passed. The applicant has therefore not objected to the deferral request.

4The Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, and on its own initiative (Rule 14.1). The Tribunal has generally deferred applications where there is an ongoing grievance under a collective agreement based on the same facts and human rights issues.

5In this case, it is apparent that there is substantial overlap between the facts and human rights issues covered by the Application and those referred to in the grievance. The grievance process has not concluded. There do not appear to be any specific circumstances in this case that would cause the Tribunal to depart from its normal practice of deferring further consideration of the Application until the grievance procedure is completed. The Application will therefore be deferred pending the completion of the grievance process.

6If the applicant believes, on conclusion of the grievance process, that her human rights issues have not been adequately addressed, she may ask to have his Application brought back on before the Tribunal.

7The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rules 14.3 and 14.4 which outline the procedure by which the Application may be brought back on after the conclusion of the grievance process.