Doug Zimmer v. Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited, 2012 HRTO 1307

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Doug Zimmer

Applicant

-and-

Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited

Respondent

-and-

United Steelworkers, Local 168

Intervenor

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Ena Chadha

Date: July 3, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 1307

Indexed as: Zimmer v. Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Doug Zimmer, Applicant

Gavin Cond, Student-at-Law, and Lauren Conti, Counsel

Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited, Respondent

Thomas Stefanik, Counsel

United Steelworkers, Local 168, Intervenor

Cathy Braker, Counsel

1This Application was filed on March 30, 2012 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleging discrimination with respect to employment because of disability. The original Application was filed as against the respondent employer, Cooper Standard, and the United Steelworkers, Local 168, the applicant’s union, as a responding party.

2On April 16, 2012, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction indicating that the Tribunal would convene a summary hearing to determine whether the Application should be dismissed as against the United Steelworkers, Local 168, on the basis that the Tribunal has held that it is not discrimination for a union to decide not to file or pursue a human rights grievance, unless the reason for doing so was based on a Code ground.

3On May 18, 2012, the United Steelworkers, Local 168, filed a request to intervene in the Application indicating that it has an interest in the outcome of any mediation or hearing into this matter.

4On May 22, 2012, the respondent employer filed a Response. The Response indicates that the respondent employer’s proper name is Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited. As such, the style of cause is amended to reflect the proper name of the respondent employer.

5On June 4, 2012, the applicant filed a request to withdraw the Application as against the United Steelworkers, Local 168, and indicates that he has no objection to the union participating as an intervening party. As such, the Application will be withdrawn as against the respondent union.

6Based on the information provided by the parties and the submissions of the union, I am satisfied that the United Steelworkers, Local 168, has an interest in the outcome of the Application. As such, and in accordance with the Tribunal’s standard practice where an applicant is a member of a bargaining unit represented by the union, the union’s request to intervene is granted.

7The Tribunal orders as follows:

i. The Application is withdrawn as against the United Steelworkers, Local 168;

ii. The Application is amended to identify the respondent employer by its proper name, Cooper Standard Automotive Canada Limited, and the style of cause is amended to reflect the same; and

iii. The union, United Steelworkers, Local 168, is granted intervenor status.

8The parties have indicated that they are amenable to mediation and the intervenor union has indicated that it seeks to participate in mediation. The Tribunal will schedule mediation for this Application.

9I am not seized