HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Stan Raper
Applicant
-and-
Foreign Agricultural Resource Management Services
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Brian Cook
Indexed as: Raper v. Foreign Agricultural Resource Management Services
1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to employment because of sex contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).
2The applicant is Stan Raper. Mr. Raper is a National Representative of UFCW Canada. The Application concerns the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program (SAWP) which includes an agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico. According to the Application, the program is administered by the Foreign Agricultural Resources Management Services (FARMS) which is a private non-profit organization that helps match requests for seasonal agricultural workers from farms in Canada with qualified workers in Mexico.
3The basis of the Application is that the SAWP and FARMS allows farms to stipulate the sex of the Mexican workers they wish to hire. According to the Application, only 4% of the Mexican workers who come to Canada under this program are women, which is less than the proportion of Canadian agricultural workers who are women.
4The applicant wishes to name as respondents FARMS and “all Ontario Farm Owners who recruit Mexican migrant farm workers under the seasonal agricultural workers program and who only recruit men through the mechanisms of the Program”. The applicant indicates that he does not have contact information for the latter group of respondents but he believes that FARMS could supply this information.
5The Tribunal has not delivered the Application to any respondent. The Tribunal sent the applicant a Notice of Intent to Dismiss and invited the applicant to make submissions about whether the Application should be dismissed. The reasons for the Notice of Intent to Dismiss include the fact that the applicant has not personally experienced any discrimination. The Code does have a provision that permits a person to bring an Application on behalf of another person providing that the other person consents. The Application that has been filed has been filed only by Mr. Raper.
6Section 34 of the Code is the section that allows for Applications to be filed with the Tribunal. It provides:
- (1) If a person believes that any of his or her rights under Part I have been infringed, the person may apply to the Tribunal for an order under section 45.2,
(a) within one year after the incident to which the application relates; or
(b) if there was a series of incidents, within one year after the last incident in the series.
(2) A person may apply under subsection (1) after the expiry of the time limit under that subsection if the Tribunal is satisfied that the delay was incurred in good faith and no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay.
7The section provides that an Application may be filed “if a person believes that any of his or her rights” under the Code have been infringed.
8The applicant in this case is a National Representative of a union. There is no allegation that his rights under the Code have been infringed. It follows that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with the Application.
9Sections 34(5) and (6) of the Code allows a person or organization to bring an Application on behalf of another person:
34(5) A person or organization, other than the Commission, may apply on behalf of another person to the Tribunal for an order under section 45.2 if the other person,
(a) would have been entitled to bring an application under subsection (1); and
(b) consents to the application.
(6) If a person or organization makes an application on behalf of another person, the person or organization may participate in the proceeding in accordance with the Tribunal rules.
10The Application in this case has not been brought on behalf of another person under section 34(5).
11In his written submissions, Mr. Raper refers to other cases where the union has been permitted to bring legal proceedings on behalf of individuals. Those cases are not helpful with respect to this Application because they do not deal with the language of the Code and the provisions of section 34 which establish the right to bring an Application to the Tribunal.
12For these reasons, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with the Applications as filed.
Dated at Toronto, this 6th day of March, 2015.
“Signed by”
Brian Cook
Vice-chair