HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Nicola Wilks
Applicant
-and-
Ventra Plastics Peterborough
Respondent
-and-
Canadian Auto Workers’ Union – Local 1987
Intervener
interim DECISION
Adjudicator: Judith Keene
Indexed as: Wilks v. Ventra Plastics Peterborough
1The applicant filed an Application, on December 18 2009, 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 on the ground of race and colour. 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 Auto Workers’ Union - Local 1987 (“Union”) on March 26, 2010. Neither party to this Application has responded to the Union’s Request and the time for doing so has elapsed.
3The Union seeks to intervene in the Application only as it might relate to the quality of the representation services the Union provided to the applicant. The Union does not seek to make submissions, generally, nor does it wish to actively intervene regarding any issue beyond the quality of its representation services, should that issue arises at the hearing.
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.
5I 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.
Dated at Toronto, this 15^th^ day of March, 2011
“Signed by”
Judith Keene
Vice-chair