Rudy Velupillai v. Hertz Canada Ltd., 2013 HRTO 803

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Rudy Velupillai

Applicant

-and-

Hertz Canada Ltd.

Respondent

-and-

United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, Local 175

Intervenor

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton

Date: May 14, 2013

Citation: 2013 HRTO 803

Indexed as: Velupillai v. Hertz Canada

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Rudy Velupillai, Applicant

No one appearing

Hertz Canada Ltd., Respondent

No one appearing

United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, Local 175, Respondent

Evan Schiller, 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 because of race, place of origin, ethnic origin, association with another person, and reprisal. The applicant works for the respondent and is represented by the United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, Local 175 (“the union”) in the workplace.

2The union filed a Request to Intervene seeking to intervene in the proceeding. It submits that it does not intend to call any evidence with respect to the Application, but wants an opportunity to make final submissions regarding: the conduct of the union or its representatives; the application or interpretation of the collective agreement; and/or the issue of remedy. Neither the applicant nor the respondent has filed a Response to a Request for Order During Proceedings, and the time for doing so has elapsed.

3Despite the fact that the Application does not contain any references to the union, a union almost always has an interest in a human rights application involving a member, and unless there are exceptional circumstances, the Tribunal will grant it intervenor status when requested. The union in this case is the bargaining agent for the applicant and the Application addresses the basis for potential discipline. Should the Tribunal find that there was discrimination in this case, the remedy it might order could have an impact on the union’s interests. For these reasons, I am satisfied that the union has an interest in the Application and the Request to Intervene is granted.