Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Marie Desbiens Applicant
-and-
Cassellholme Home for the Aged Respondent
-and-
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local, 146 Intervenor
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané Date: November 8, 2013 Citation: 2013 HRTO 1873 Indexed as: Desbiens v. Cassellholme Home for the Aged
APPEARANCES
Marie Desbiens, Applicant Tracy Davis-Foreshaw, Representative
Cassellholme Home for the Aged, Respondent Lise Ellis, Representative
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local, 146, Intervenor Mona Staples, Counsel
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 against Cassellholme Home for the Aged ("Cassellholme") and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 133 (the "Union"). In Interim Decision 2013 HRTO 1800, the Tribunal found that the Application as against the Union respondent had no reasonable prospect of success.
2This Interim Decision deals with the Union's Request to Intervene. On November 4, 2013, the Tribunal received submissions from the applicant in which she opposes the Union's Request to intervene. The applicant takes the position that the Union has failed to establish how it or the collective agreement would be impacted if it is not granted intervenor status.
3In these submissions the applicant advises that there is currently a duty of fair representation complaint before the Ontario Labour Relations Board (the "Labour Board") against the Union and that a pre-hearing conference is scheduled on December 17, 2013.
4Cassellholme does not oppose the Union's Request to intervene.
Decision
5Having reviewed the pleadings it is clear that the Union is an important part of the factual matrix of this matter. The Union as the applicant's bargaining agent was repeatedly involved in attempts to accommodate the applicant and communications with the respondent. In these circumstances, it would be unfair to deny the Union participatory rights. This is especially so since the Union is a responding party before the Labour Board with respect to overlapping issues and facts. Despite the applicant's opposition, in light of the applicant's allegations, the Union has a significant interest in this matter and I grant its Request to intervene.
6Since all parties consent this matter will be referred to mediation. Having considered that there is currently a pre-hearing on December 17, 2013, I find that it is appropriate not to schedule the Mediation prior to February 2014.
7I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 8th day of November, 2013.
"Signed by"
Geneviève Debané Vice-chair