Jarrett v. Halton Regional Police Service, 2013 HRTO 197

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Shannon Jarrett

Applicant

-and-

Halton Regional Police Service and Halton Regional Police Services Board

-and-

Halton Regional Police Association

Intervenor

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Sheri Price

Date: February 4, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 197

Indexed as: Jarrett v. Halton Regional Police Service

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of family status contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant was employed as a “Temporary as Required Contract Communicator” with the respondent, Halton Regional Police Service. In that employment, the applicant was a member of a bargaining unit represented by a bargaining agent, the Halton Regional Police Association (“HRPA”).

2HRPA has filed a Request to Intervene in the Application.

3In her response to the Request to Intervene, the applicant consented to HRPA being copied on any materials filed with the Tribunal in this matter and to HRPA attending the mediation in this matter. It is somewhat unclear whether the applicant has any objection to HRPA being granted status to intervene in the Application. What is clear is that the applicant takes the position that the precise scope and form of HRPA’s participation in any hearing should be determined as a preliminary matter, prior to the commencement of the hearing, and not at the “hearing proper”.

4The respondents have not responded to the Request to Intervene.

5The Tribunal has found on numerous occasions that a bargaining agent such as HRPA nearly always has an interest in an application brought by a member of one of its bargaining units and that, absent exceptional circumstances, will be granted intervention status when it requests it. See Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 131 at para. 13, and cases citing that decision.

6Having considered the parties’ submissions, I see no reason in this case to depart from the Tribunal’s established practice regarding the granting of intervenor status when the applicant is represented by a bargaining agent. As the applicant’s exclusive bargaining agent with respect to the terms and conditions of her employment, I am satisfied that HRPA has an interest in the Application and that it ought to be permitted to intervene in the Application.

7HRPA’s Request to Intervene in the Application is granted. The adjudicator assigned to hear the Application will determine the nature and extent of HRPA’s participation in the hearing; and whether such issue ought to be determined prior to or at the commencement of the hearing.

8I am not seized of this matter.