Atadero v. Borek, 2015 HRTO 1216

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Grace Atadero Applicant

-and-

Christopher Borek Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Keith Brennenstuhl

Date: September 14, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1216

Indexed as: Atadero v. Christopher Borek

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Grace Atadero, Applicant

Self-represented

Introduction

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").

2In the Application, the applicant claimed that the respondent did not perform the essential duties of his job and that he did this to obtain more shifts and "with the end objective of securing more work hours away from" the applicant.

3On August 13, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss Application ("NOID") because it appeared to be outside of the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Specifically, the NOID indicated that the narrative setting out the incidents of alleged discrimination in the Application failed to identify any specific acts of discrimination within the meaning of the Code. The NOID also indicated that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over general allegations of unfairness unless the unfairness is connected, in whole or in part, to one of the grounds specifically set out in Part 1 of the Code.

4In the NOID, the Tribunal directed the applicant to provide written submissions regarding the issue identified in the NOID. The applicant filed submissions opposing dismissal. However, she did not identify any acts of discrimination relating to any ground protected under the Code.

Analysis and Decision

5At this preliminary stage in the proceeding, the Tribunal will dismiss an application only if it is "plain and obvious" that it is outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. I find that it is plain and obvious that the applicant's claim is outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, as the Application does not identify any acts of alleged discrimination based on any ground protected under the Code.

6The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over cases of general unfairness that is unconnected to a ground protected under the Code. In her response to the NOID, the applicant did not identify any acts that would constitute discrimination on the basis of disability. She also did not identify any acts of alleged discrimination that were based on any other ground protected under the Code.

Order

7For the reasons set out above, the Application is dismissed as outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.