HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Julie Lynn Robert
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Police Services Board
Respondent
A N D B E T W E E N:
Linda Labao
Applicant
-and-
Toronto Police Services Board
Respondent
-and-
Toronto Police Association
Intervenor
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Ena Chadha
Indexed as: Robert v. Toronto Police Services Board
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Toronto Police Association, Intervenor
Jessica Kearsley, Counsel
1On September 17, 2012, the Toronto Police Association (“Association”) filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings asking that the Tribunal grant the Association intervenor status in Application 2011-09267-I.
2Applications 2011-09266-I and 2011-09267-I were consolidated by Case Assessment Direction dated September 17, 2012.
3The Association seeks full participation in the proceedings and submits that the return to work issues and remedies raised in Application 2011-09267-I may affect bargaining units represented by the Association.
4Neither the applicants, nor the respondent filed submissions in response to the Association’s request to intervene.
5As the Tribunal indicated in Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 131:
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.
6As such, and in accordance with the Tribunal’s standard practice where an applicant is a member of a bargaining unit represented by a union, the Association’s request to intervene is granted.
7The scope of the Association’s participation in the hearing will be determined by the adjudicator overseeing the hearing on the merits of the Applications.
8I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto, this 25th day of October, 2012.
“Signed by”
Ena Chadha
Vice-chair