Michelle Robertson v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, 2011 HRTO 2225

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Michelle Robertson

Applicant

-and-

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Dough Dalgleish, Tom O’Connell, Charlie Boorsma, Mark Dittenhoffer and Peter Sherfield

Respondents

-and-

Ontario Public Service Employees Union

Intervenor

interiM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton

Date: December 9, 2011

Citation: 2011 HRTO 2225

Indexed as: Robertson v. Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

1The applicant filed an Application under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.19, as amended (the “Code”), on May 10, 2010, alleging discrimination on the basis of disability, sex and reprisal in employment. She is a bargaining unit employee and represented at the workplace by Ontario Public Service Employees Union (“the union”). A hearing is scheduled for December 19, 20 and 21, 2011, pursuant to a Confirmation of Hearing Notice issued by the Tribunal in June 2011.

2The union filed a Request to Intervene (“the Request”) in June 2010 seeking intervenor status in this proceeding. The respondents do not oppose the union’s Request. The applicant has not filed a Response to the Request and the time for doing so has now elapsed.

3The Tribunal has found on numerous occasions that a union nearly always has an interest in an application brought by a member of one of its bargaining units and that, absent exceptional circumstances, it will be granted intervention status when it so requests it. See, for example, Bishop v. Grand Erie District School Board, 2011 HRTO 1998.

4In this case, it appears that collective agreement language negotiated between the respondent and the union may be applicable to the applicant’s situation and I find that the union does have an interest in this Application. Accordingly, the Request to Intervene is granted and the style of cause is amended.

5If the parties have not already done so, they are directed to provide a copy of their productions, list of witnesses and witness summaries to the union by December 14, 2011.

Order

6The Tribunal orders that:

a) the union is added as an intervenor to the Application;

b) if the parties have not done so already, they are directed to provide a copy of their productions, list of witnesses, and witness summaries, to the union by December 14, 2011.