HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Gang Lin Applicant
-and-
Caterpillar Tunneling Canada Corporation Respondent
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Geneviève Debané
Date: February 3, 2015
Citation: 2015 HRTO 157
Indexed as: Lin v. Caterpillar Tunneling Canada Corporation
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Gang Lin, Applicant Jefferson Tao, Representative
Caterpillar Tunneling Canada Corporation, Respondent Jonathon Cocker, Counsel
1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code").
2For the following reasons I am of the view that it is appropriate to defer the Application pending the conclusion of the applicant's appeal to the Ontario Labour Relations Board ("OLRB").
3The Application alleges amongst other things, that his termination from employment and failure of the respondent to provide him with an extended working notice period is discriminatory. The respondent asserts that the applicant has signed two releases, which preclude the applicant from filing this Application.
4The applicant filed a complaint with the Ministry of Labour, pursuant to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 seeking the payment of wages, holiday pay, termination pay, severance pay and alleging reprisal. An Employment Standards Officer issued a Decision with respect to the matter. The applicant is appealing that Decision to the OLRB.
5The Tribunal may defer consideration of an Application on such terms as it may determine, on its own initiative or at the request of a party (Rule 14.1). Deferral of an Application seeks to ensure that proceedings dealing with the same facts or issues do not run concurrently, thereby raising the possibility of inconsistent decisions on facts or law. The Tribunal will generally defer an Application where there are ongoing proceedings before the OLRB based on the same facts and issues. However, the Tribunal must also consider whether deferral is the most fair, just and expeditious way of proceeding with the Application.
6I am satisfied that one of the issues that the OLRB may consider is the enforceability of the releases. Further, the OLRB may also consider the circumstances surrounding the applicant's termination from employment.
7Since the issues in the Application and the proceedings before the OLRB overlap significantly, proceeding with the Application at the Tribunal could very well lead to inconsistent decisions on the facts and/or legal issues raised in the Application and the proceedings before the OLRB. The primary purpose of deferring an Application is to avoid such potential inconsistency. I find that, in all of the circumstances, deferring the Application is appropriate.
8The Tribunal orders that the Application is deferred pending the conclusion of the proceeding before the OLRB.
9The parties' attention is drawn to Rules 14.3 and 14.4 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure, which address how the Application may be brought back on before the Tribunal, following conclusion of the proceedings before the OLRB. The Rules of Procedure are available on the Tribunal's website, www.hrto.ca.
10I am not seized.
Dated at Toronto, this 3rd day of February, 2015.
"Signed by"
Geneviève Debané Vice-chair