Armoogam v. J.A.K. Tubular Products, 2014 HRTO 269

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Ronald Armoogam Applicant

-and-

J.A.K. Tubular Products Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Brian Cook Date: February 27, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 269 Indexed as: Armoogam v. J.A.K. Tubular Products

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of disability contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). The Application indicated that there was an ongoing proceeding at the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB). On January 15, 2014, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer the Application until the proceeding at the WSIB was resolved. The parties were invited to make submissions on whether the Application should be deferred.

2The applicant filed a submission in which he opposes deferral, suggesting that the WSIB will not deal with the issues raised in the Application. The respondent filed a Response to the Application. It did not address the deferral issue but instead asked the Tribunal to dismiss the Application under section 45.1 of the Code, on the grounds that the WSIB has already dealt with the substance of the Application. Section 45.1 reads as follows:

45.1 The Tribunal may dismiss an application, in whole or in part, in accordance with its rules if the Tribunal is of the opinion that another proceeding has appropriately dealt with the substance of the application.

CONCLUSIONS

3The information provided by the parties indicates that the applicant filed a claim for benefits with the WSIB in respect of an injury that the applicant related to a work-related incident on October 18, 2012, and a second injury, or recurrence of the first injury in November 2012. The WSIB determined that the applicant was not entitled to benefits because there was a delay in seeking medical attention and reporting. It is not clear if the applicant has pursued any objection or appeal of these decisions.

4The respondent’s request that the Application be dismissed under section 45.1 of the Code is dismissed. The WSIB has determined that the applicant is not entitled to benefits for a claimed injury or injuries. The Application alleges that the respondent did not accommodate the applicant’s disability and terminated his employment by falsely stating that the applicant had quit his employment. The Respondent disputes the allegations and points to the findings of the WSIB in support of its position.

5While there is clearly some overlap between the issues in the Application and the issues dealt with by the WSIB, it cannot be said that the WSIB has appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application.

6It is not clear if the applicant is pursuing an objection or appeal to any of the WSIB decisions. As a result, it is not possible to determine if it is appropriate to defer the Application at this time. By March 12, 2014, the applicant shall file with the Tribunal and copied to the respondent, information about the status of his WSIB claims and in particular, explain whether he has filed an objection or appeal with the WSIB or if he intends to do so. He shall also provide copies of any decisions of the WSIB about his claims.

7The respondent is asked to clarify if it would like to try mediation at the Tribunal as a way of resolving the issues in the Application.