Karen R. Bock

The applicants requested an order during proceedings to amend their human rights applications to add a claim for $15,000 in general damages for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.

The respondents took no position on the request.

The Tribunal granted the amendment, finding no prejudice to the respondents as the applicants were not seeking to add new grounds of discrimination, new parties, or withdraw admissions.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging harassment and discrimination by her employer.

Prior to this, her union had filed a grievance on her behalf raising the same human rights issues.

The Tribunal considered whether to defer the application pending the outcome of the grievance arbitration.

Finding that the grievance was filed first, dealt with the same subject matter, and was scheduled for arbitration before an arbitrator with the authority to apply the Human Rights Code, the Tribunal ordered the deferral of the application.

The respondent requested the dismissal of an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability.

The applicant alleged the respondent harassed her, withheld WSIB payments, withdrew money from her bank account, and failed to accommodate her workplace injury.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the allegations regarding WSIB payments and bank withdrawals had no connection to a Code ground.

Furthermore, the allegations regarding accommodation and harassment occurred more than a year prior to the application being filed, and the applicant provided no good faith explanation for the delay.

The applicant hospital sought judicial review of an arbitrator's decision regarding the calculation of an employee's long-term disability benefits under a collective agreement.

The hospital argued that the employee's benefits should be reduced by the amount of a disability pension she could have received had she terminated her employment.

The arbitrator found that the pension was not 'available' because electing it would require the employee to terminate her employment and forfeit significant health care benefits.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the arbitrator's interpretation of the collective agreement was reasonable and entitled to deference.