Steele v. Maxville Tank Lines, 2015 HRTO 1636

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Steven Steele

Applicant

-and-

Maxville Tank Lines, Roger Villeneuve, and Beverly Banks

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: David Muir

Date: December 2, 2015

Citation: 2015 HRTO 1636

Indexed as: Steele v. Maxville Tank Lines

APPEARANCES

Stephen Steele, Applicant

Self-represented

Maxville Tank Lines, Roger Villeneuve, and Beverly Banks, Respondents

Beverly Banks, Representative

1This Application, filed under the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”), alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of age and ethnic origin.

2Having reviewed the file, the Tribunal directed that a preliminary hearing be held to determine whether this Application should be dismissed, in whole or in part, on the basis that there may be no reasonable prospect that the Application or part of the Application would succeed.

3The preliminary hearing was held on December 1, 2015 by telephone conference call. All parties participated. At the preliminary hearing the applicant withdrew his claim that a factor in the decision to terminate his employment was his age.

4This case will proceed to the next step in the Tribunal process. The Tribunal’s Rule 19A provides that where the Tribunal that an Application will not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 19A it need not give reasons. However in this circumstance the following comments are appropriate. Having heard the submissions of the parties I am not satisfied that it can be said at this stage of the proceeding that the applicant has no reasonable prospect of establishing that a factor in the decision to terminate him was his ethnic origin. That is not to say that there may not be difficulties with his case. For example, the applicant claims that it is because he does not speak French that he was terminated. Language is not co-extensive with ethnic origin but is related. However the applicant was able to point to evidence that may be available to him that may tend to establish that a factor in the decision was his ethnic origin. He described several incidents of others drivers with who he asserts are francophone being treated differently than he was after workplace incidents. The respondent may have answers to these allegations of differential treatment but these may require evidence from the respondent in a hearing on the merits.

Next Steps

5The applicant has agreed to mediation. The respondents have not. The respondents will advise the Tribunal and the applicant within 7 days of the date of this Interim Decision whether they wish to attend mediation failing which the case will be scheduled for a two day hearing.

6I am not seized of this case.