HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Benito Zeppieri
Applicant
-and-
Labour Ready {Dependable Temporary Labour}, Gena Woolcott, and Jen Crigger
Respondents
DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Indexed as: Zeppieri v. Labour Ready {Dependable Temporary Labour}
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Benito Zeppieri, Applicant
Self-represented
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 race and record of offences. The Application has not yet been delivered to the respondents.
2On February 7, 2013, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction which directed the applicant to file submissions to explain why and how the allegations in the Application are linked to race and record of offences.
3On February 7, 2013, the Tribunal received the applicant’s submissions.
4For the reasons that follow this Application is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
5The Application alleges that the applicant attended a placement agency and that he was asked to take a 73 point questionnaire. At the conclusion of the test, he was advised that he had not passed the test. The applicant raised the issue that he believed that he may have accidently skipped one of the questions or hit two buttons at the same time which could have affected the other questions on the test.
6The applicant made repeated inquiries to determine why he did not successfully pass the test and the respondent eventually served him with a Notice of Trespass.
DECISION
7Rule 13.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure provides that the Tribunal may dismiss an application that is outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Rule 13.2 further states that where it appears to the Tribunal that an application is outside its jurisdiction, it shall, prior to sending the application to the respondent, request submissions from the applicant. Under the Tribunal’s jurisprudence, an application will only be dismissed at this preliminary stage if it is “plain and obvious” on the face of the application that it does not fall within its jurisdiction. See Masood v. Bruce Power, 2008 HRTO 381; Morin v. Alliance de la fonction publique du Canada, 2008 HRTO 58; and Hotte v. Ontario (Finance), 2008 HRTO 63.
8In his submissions the applicant states that he does not know under which Act this issue falls but that it impacts his right and opportunity to work. He believes that the test is outdated, unfair, offensive and biased.
9There are no submissions which would link the events in the Application to the applicant’s race or record of offences. In the Application the applicant has not indicated that he indeed has a record of offences.
10In these circumstances, I find that it is plain and obvious based on the Application and submissions filed by the applicant that the Application does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
11The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 6th day of March, 2013.
“Signed by”
Geneviève Debané
Vice-chair