Menard v. STC Construction (Toronto) Inc., 2014 HRTO 616

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Roch Menard Applicant

-and-

STC Construction (Toronto) Inc. and Curtis Carlton Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alison Renton Date: May 1, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 616 Indexed as: Menard v. STC Construction (Toronto) Inc.

1This is an Application filed under section 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 sex. In the Application, the applicant alleges that the personal respondent, the site supervisor, made a number of homophobic slurs towards him that he reported to the corporate respondent. The applicant alleges that he was told by the corporate respondent that the matter would be investigated, but he does not know the outcome of any investigation. After raising this issue with the corporate respondent, the applicant was told that his employment contract had ended. He disputes that he had an employment contract.

2A joint Response was filed by the respondents denying the allegations. In the Response, the respondents request that the Tribunal dismiss the Application under section 45.1 of the Code because another proceeding, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (“the WSIB”), had in whole or in part appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application. Although they did not make specific submissions, the respondents provided a copy of the WSIB’s January 14, 2014 letter (“the WSIB letter”) to the applicant in which the applicant was advised that he was denied benefits under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 16, Sched. A, because his situation did not meet the criteria for traumatic mental stress as required by its policy.

3On April 10, 2014, the Tribunal sent the applicant a copy of the Response, which included the respondents’ request to dismiss the Application. The Tribunal specifically directed the applicant to file a Reply, including complete submissions in response to the respondents’ request to dismiss.

4The applicant filed a Reply on April 23, 2014. He simply stated “false and inaccurate” as his reply to the Response.

the law

5Section 45.1 of the Code states:

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.

analysis

6The respondents’ request to dismiss pursuant to section 45.1 of the Code is denied.

7According to the WSIB letter, the applicant was denied benefits because his situation did not fall under the WSIB’s policy on traumatic mental stress. The WSIB did not address the substance of the Application, namely the alleged uttering of homophobic slurs, the corporate respondent’s alleged failure to investigate into those alleged slurs, and the applicant’s termination.

8Accordingly, the Application will continue to proceed through the Tribunal’s process. As the respondents have not indicated a willingness to attend mediation, the Tribunal will schedule the matter for a one-day in-person hearing. If the respondents are now agreeable to participate in mediation, they are directed to indicate their willingness within five days of the date of this Interim Decision, by email, to the Tribunal, copying the applicant.

9I am not seized with this matter.