HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Rodney Serson
Applicant
-and-
Limestone District School Board
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Leslie Reaume
Indexed as: Serson v. Limestone District School Board
1This Application is scheduled for a 2-day hearing on November 17 and 18, 2015 in Kingston, Ontario.
2On October 13, 2015, the Tribunal issued a Case Assessment Direction (“CAD”) advising the applicant that he had not complied with Rules 16 and 17, the details of which were set out in the Notice of Rescheduled Hearing dated May 28, 2015. The applicant was advised that his Application may be dismissed as abandoned if he failed to comply with the Rules within 7 days.
3On October 13, 2015, the applicant responded to the CAD with the following message by email:
I have complied with ALL requests that the HRTO have sent me!
I don't understand what this is about!
The date has been set for 2 days in November, here in Kingston!
However, my witnesses are either afraid to stand up for me or will not contact me back!
Their names have been used in false reports and files and they fear for their own job safety!
The Limestone District School Board is supplying information dated well after my termination and are making false allegations that cannot be verified!
They (the LDSB) know exactly what they are doing, and have done, is illegal, and will stop at nothing to protect their own interests.
It is obvious, by my employment history with them, that I was not given fair and equal opportunity.
As a male Education Assistant I should have had full time work, assigned by the board, every year but I was never given one after they discovered that I was gay!
Many positions that were assigned to male only E.A.s were repeatedly given to or taken by women due to the lack of males in the board.
In fact the board went as far as to hire students which had not even finished their courses and none Canadian citizens to fill these male only positions, because their was no question of their sexual orientation.
The Limestone District School Board has either threatened or informed the people that would have been my witnesses that their jobs were on the line!
Therefore it is impossible for me to continue with my case against them only having the documents and proof that I now hold!
4On October 14, 2015, the Tribunal sent the applicant a response to his email of October 13, 2015:
Mr Serson – In the Tribunal’s attached Notice of Hearing issued on May 28, 2015, the HRTO provided guidelines about hearing disclosure documents, pertaining to Rules 16 and 17 of the HRTO’s Rules of Procedure. If you had questions or concerns about disclosure and/or witnesses, you could utilize the resources of the Human Rights Legal Support Centre to obtain legal advice or recommendations on how to proceed or what to submit.
You may want to contact them at 1-866-625-5179, in order to assist you in a timely manner, given that your deadline is October 20th by 5pm. As an adjudicative body, we are unable to provide you with assistance in this manner.
5On October 26, 2015, the Tribunal sent the following email to the applicant:
Mr. Serson - In response to the Case Assessment Direction (CAD) issued October 13, 2015 by Vice-Chair Reaume, you submitted the correspondence below and we replied. We further advised that you had until October 20, 2015 to comply with the CAD. To date, we have not received anything further and we are uncertain, given your final sentence, whether you intend to attend the hearing scheduled to begin on November 17th. We are forwarding your correspondence to ensure that the other parties are aware that you have replied to the CAD, although not fully.
Please confirm, with a copy to the other parties to this application, by Thursday, October 29th, whether you intend to attend the hearing days, and what documents (including your original application) you intend to rely upon at the hearing. If you are the only person who will be providing testimony on the hearing date(s) please also confirm this in writing.
6The applicant was contacted by telephone by the Tribunal following the expiry of the October 29, 2015 deadline. The Tribunal confirmed that the applicant’s contact information was correct and reiterated that if the applicant did not respond in any way the Tribunal might issue a decision dismissing the Application for abandonment.
7To date, the applicant has not responded to the Tribunal’s request for confirmation that he will be attending the hearing. The respondent has requested that the Tribunal dismiss this Application as abandoned.
8Having considered the communications between the applicant and the Tribunal, I am satisfied that he has decided not to continue to pursue this Application.
9Accordingly, the Application is dismissed as abandoned.
Dated at Toronto, this 12th day of November, 2015.
“Signed By”
Leslie Reaume
Vice-chair