Henderson v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing, 2014 HRTO 408

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Jessica Henderson

Applicant

-and-

Toyota Motor Manufacturing

Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Douglas Sanderson Date: March 21, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 408 Indexed as: Henderson v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing

APPEARANCES

Jessica Henderson, Applicant Self-represented

Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Respondent Michelle Alton, 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 disability. This Interim Decision addresses the respondent’s request to remove the individual respondent, Sandra Brubaker-Lewis, from the Application.

Background

2The applicant alleges that the respondent failed to accommodate her disability-related restrictions arising out of workplace injuries and required her to work when she was unable to. The applicant also alleges that she was subject to workplace harassment regarding her need for accommodation. The respondent denies any failure to accommodate and that the applicant experienced workplace harassment contrary to the Code.

The Request

3The respondent filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings seeking the removal of Ms. Brubaker-Lewis as an individual respondent. Ms. Brubaker-Lewis is an Occupational Health Nurse employed by the respondent who dealt with the applicant in this capacity. The respondent submitted thorough submissions in support of this request, but it is unnecessary to record them, as the applicant has indicated that she does not oppose the request, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the respondent, Toyota Motor Manufacturing, accepts all responsibility for Ms. Brubaker-Lewis’ actions;
2. That the applicant may continue to rely on evidence regarding Ms. Brubaker-Lewis’ actions; and,
3. That the applicant may continue to seek as a remedy an order to have Ms. Brubaker-Lewis take human rights training.

4In its request, the respondent stated that the Ms. Brubaker-Lewis’ was acting within the scope of her employment duties in her interactions with the applicant. Section 46.3 of the Code deems an employer to be liable for the actions of its employees, subject to exceptions not applicable here, and the respondent states that it does not “take issue” with this section. The respondent is therefore vicariously liable for the individual respondent’s actions. Removal of the individual respondent would not preclude the applicant from leading evidence regarding the individual respondent’s actions and, assuming the Tribunal made a finding of Code violation, it would be within the Tribunal’s remedial jurisdiction to order the respondent to require Ms. Brubaker-Lewis to take human rights training, if appropriate.

Order

5The request to remove the individual respondent is granted. The style of cause shall be amended accordingly.