Becky Ruffolo v. DHL Express/Loomis, 2013 HRTO 1824

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Becky Ruffolo

Applicant

-and-

DHL Express/Loomis

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Paul Aterman
Date: October 29, 2013
Citation: 2013 HRTO 1824
Indexed as: Ruffolo v. DHL Express/Loomis

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Becky Ruffolo, Applicant

Peter Mancini, Counsel

DHL Express/Loomis, Respondent

Joseph Cohen-Lyons, Counsel

Introduction

1This is an Application filed under s. 34 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.

2The respondent has requested that the Application be dismissed on the grounds that it is a federally-regulated enterprise engaged in interprovincial transportation and therefore not subject to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. In support of these submissions the respondent has produced a 2005 certification order of the Canada Industrial Relations Board which states that DHL International Express Ltd. is the successor employer of Loomis Courier Service, following a sale of the latter to the former. It also produced a 2011 letter from Labour Canada confirming that Loomis Express (a division of the respondent) is subject to the Canada Labour Code as it engages in interprovincial transportation.

3The applicant consents to dismissal of the Application on the grounds sought by the respondent.

4The Code only applies to matters that fall within provincial jurisdiction and does not apply to federal undertakings. Under s. 92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867, the regulation of interprovincial transportation is a matter of exclusive federal jurisdiction.

5As the parties agree on the nature of the respondent’s operation as a federal undertaking, this Application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

order

6The Application is dismissed.