McLean v. People in Transition (Alliston) Inc., 2016 HRTO 42

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

B E T W E E N:

Carol McLean

Applicant

-and-

People in Transition (Alliston) Inc. c.o.b. My Sister’s Place, Rainy Chappell, Danielle Harrison and Tiffany Gallant

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Jennifer Scott Date: January 11, 2016 Citation: 2016 HRTO 42 Indexed as: McLean v. People in Transition (Alliston) Inc.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Carol McLean, Applicant Marianne Craig, Counsel

People in Transition (Alliston) Inc. c.o.b. as My Sister’s Place, Respondent Dianne Jozefacki, Counsel

Introduction

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

2The applicant has filed a Request for Order During Proceedings seeking to add three individuals as personal respondents to the Application and to amend the remedy sought in the Application.

Request to Add Individual Respondents

3The applicant seeks to add the following individuals as respondents: Tiffany Gallant, Rainy Chappell and Danielle Harrison.

4The applicant was self-represented at the time she drafted the Application. In the Application, the applicant indicated there were respondents in addition to the corporate respondent. In the box dealing with the names of witnesses, the applicant stated Rainy Chappell, Danielle Harris and Tiffany Gallant “are the individuals that discriminated – age and also did the harassment”. In providing further information after filing the Application, the applicant stated Rainy Chappell, Danielle Harrison and Tiffany Gallant are the “individuals that are involved in the harassment and age discrimination against me”. In response to the Notice of Incomplete Application, the applicant stated “there are 3 other respondents besides my employer – the 3 are co-workers. The fourth is my boss”.

5In my view, it is clear from the information provided by the applicant when filing the Application that Tiffany Gallant, Rainy Chappell and Danielle Harrison were named by the applicant as respondents. She simply omitted to name them on question 4 of the Application. The particulars of the discrimination and harassment are set out in the Reply.

6As such, it is not necessary to determine whether these individuals should be added as individual respondents to the Application. They are already respondents and are reflected in the style of cause.

Request to Amend Remedy

7In determining requests to amend applications, the Tribunal generally considers the nature of the proposed amendments, the reasons for the amendments, the timing of the request to amend, and the prejudice to the respondent. See, for example, Dube v. Canadian Career College, 2008 HRTO 336, and Wozeilek v. 7-Eleven Canada Inc., 2009 HRTO 926.

8Having considered the factors set out above, I grant the applicant’s request to amend the remedy sought in her Application. This Application is at a very early stage of proceedings. Therefore, I see no prejudice to granting the applicant’s request to amend the remedy she is seeking. The Tribunal has regularly granted such requests in past decisions up to the date of the hearing. See, for example, Marino v. Compuware Corporation of Canada, 2011 HRTO 1390, and Loney v. Combusco Enterprises, 2011 HRTO 1050.

9This remedial amendment is made without any determination by the Tribunal as to the appropriateness of the remedies sought, and without prejudice to any position the respondent may wish to take regarding this issue.

order

10For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal orders as follows:

a. Tiffany Gallant, Rainy Chappell and Danielle Harrison are respondents to this Application. They may respond to the Application within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision unless the corporate respondent indicates that the Response that has been filed is on behalf of all respondents.

b. The applicant’s request to amend her Application is granted. The respondents may file an amended Response within 35 days of the date of this Interim Decision.

11I am not seized.