Kevin Cavanaugh v. Scott Builders/Graham Construction and Robert Lovelace, 2012 HRTO 1159

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Kevin Cavanaugh

Applicant

-and-

Scott Builders/Graham Construction and Robert Lovelace

Respondents

RECONSIDERATION DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook

Date: June 12, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1159

Indexed as: Cavanagh v. Scott Builders Inc.

WRITTEN sUBMISSIONS

Kevin Cavanagh, Applicant

Self-Represented

1On April 17, 2012 the Tribunal issued its Decision in this Application, 2012 HRTO 770. The Decision dismissed the Application because it was not filed within one year of the last alleged incident of discrimination and there was not a good faith explanation for the delay. The applicant has asked the Tribunal to reconsider its Decision.

2The applicant reported a work-related knee injury in January 2010. He filed a claim with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) and also filed a complaint with the Employment Standards Branch of the Ministry of Labour. The applicant alleges that the respondent discriminated against him because of disability by refusing to employ him after April 2010 and that this was the last discriminatory event.

3The Application was filed on August 2, 2011. As noted in the Decision, the Application was accordingly not filed within one year of the last incident of alleged discrimination.

4The applicant has provided an explanation for some of the delay. In particular, he says that the complaint that he made to the Employment Standards Branch of the Ministry of Labour included a complaint that he had not been paid wages that he was due for time worked in April 2010, and also included a complaint that his employer had discriminated against him. It was not until May 2011 that he was advised by the Employment Standards Branch officer that the Employment Standards Branch would not deal with his complaints of discrimination.

5As noted in the Decision, this provides an explanation for the delay that was incurred for the period from April 2010 to May 2011. However the Application was not filed until August 2, 2011. The applicant has provided no explanation for the delay in filing the Application for the period from May 2011 to August 2, 2011.

6In his Request for Reconsideration, the applicant has restated the reasons why he believes the respondent discriminated against him in 2010 in relation to his knee disability and the fact he was an injured worker. He has also restated the fact that until May 2011 he thought that the Employment Standards Branch of the Ministry of Labour was dealing with his allegations of discrimination in employment. The Request for Reconsideration does not address the period from May 2011 to August 2, 2011 or provide any explanation for why the Application was not filed until August 2, 2011 although the applicant knew in May 2011 that the Employment Standards Branch of the Ministry of Labour was not going to deal with his allegations of discrimination in employment.

7The applicant has not provided any basis that would cause the Tribunal to reconsider Decision 2012 HRTO 770 and the Request for Reconsideration is denied.