Doucette v. Toronto Transit Commission, 2012 HRTO 979

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Elaine Doucette

Applicant

-and-

Toronto Transit Commission

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Mary Truemner

Date: May 15, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 979

Indexed as: Doucette v. Toronto Transit Commission

APPEARANCES

Elaine Doucette, Applicant ) Self-represented

Ross Visconti and ) Steve Lavender, Counsel Thomas McPherson, Respondents )

1The applicant filed an Application on February 15, 2011, under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”) in which she alleges discrimination on the basis of sex in the context of employment. In essence, the Application alleges that she was denied a job promotion because of her gender.

2The respondent filed a Request for Order During Proceedings on November 25, 2011, (“Request”). The respondent requested particulars, or rather clarification, with respect to whether the applicant was claiming that the job description and/or posted qualifications requiring a college education with a concentration in business administration or computers were discriminatory, and, if so, the respondent requested that the applicant’s union be added as a respondent. The request was heard by way of teleconference on May 10, 2012.

3At the hearing, the applicant confirmed that there is no basis for the respondent’s Request because the applicant is not alleging that the job description and/or posted qualifications with respect to the educational requirement are discriminatory contrary to the Code. The parties therefore agreed that the respondent’s Request should be denied, and the applicant’s union should not be added as a respondent.

4The respondent’s Request is denied, and the Tribunal will proceed to schedule a two day hearing to decide the Application on its merits.

5I am not seized.