Tchaka Adofo v. City of Toronto Housing Unit, 2014 HRTO 1349

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Tchaka Adofo

Applicant

-and-

City of Toronto Housing Unit

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Paul Aterman

Date: September 11, 2014

Citation: 2014 HRTO 1349

Indexed as: Adofo v. City of Toronto Housing Unit

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Tchaka Adofo, Applicant

Self-represented

1This Application alleges a reprisal with respect to employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The applicant works for the respondent in a shelter for homeless people. A conflict between the applicant and the respondent has arisen because the applicant was disciplined for how he dealt with a client of the shelter. The applicant feels that the discipline was unfair because the respondent’s managers failed to take into account the difficult circumstances he was facing in dealing with shelter clients. The respondent has not yet filed a Response to the Application.

3On July 23, 2014 the Tribunal sent the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss (“NOID”). The NOID notes that the applicant has identified reprisal as the ground which links the respondent’s alleged actions to a violation of the Code. However, it also notes that the Application itself provides no information that would support a finding that any action of the respondent was a reprisal that was due to the applicant trying to enforce his rights under the Code, or that it was due to the fact that he refused to infringe the Code rights of any other person.

4The NOID directs the applicant to provide submissions as to why his Application should not be dismissed because the incidents he describes do not show a potential violation of the Code.

5The applicant has provided submissions which give a detailed explanation of why he thinks he was treated unfairly in the workplace. He feels that he was subjected to harassment and had to work in a poisoned environment. However, like his Application, his submissions do not establish a link between the allegations of unfair treatment and any of the prohibited grounds of discrimination under the Code.

6The Tribunal has no authority to deal with allegations of general unfairness. It can only deal with allegations of discrimination contrary to the Code and with certain kinds of allegations of reprisal. The reprisal allegations have to be that a person was retaliated against because they tried to exercise their rights under the Code, or that they were retaliated against because they refuse to infringe the Code rights of another person.

7None of the applicant’s allegations meet these criteria. His concern appears to be about unfair treatment, but it is not treatment that engages any of the specific grounds set out in the Code. It may be the case that the applicant’s supervisors retaliated against him because he disputed the reasons that he was disciplined, but a reprisal of this kind is not one the Tribunal has any authority to deal with, as it is not a reprisal for the exercise of Code rights.

8Because the Tribunal has no jurisdiction over the kinds of allegations that the applicant has raised, this Application must be dismissed.

order

9The Application is dismissed.