Laurel Johnson

The applicant filed a complaint under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act alleging that her employer engaged in reprisals against her for having filed a human rights complaint regarding sexual harassment.

The employer brought preliminary motions to dismiss the complaint due to undue delay, lack of jurisdiction, and because the matters were previously settled under the Human Rights Code.

The Board declined to inquire into allegations prior to 1996 due to extreme delay and lack of reasonable explanation.

The Board also held that sexual harassment allegations should be pursued under the Human Rights Code, not the OHSA.

The Board found no evidence that the applicant sought to enforce the OHSA prior to April 1996, and dismissed the reprisal allegations for that period.

The matter was re-listed to deal solely with the remaining timely health and safety issues raised in an April 1996 letter.

The Employer objected to a Review Officer's Order finding it failed to maintain pay equity for female job classes represented by CUPE 1734.

The Employer argued that wage disparities were due to differences in bargaining strength under s. 8(2) of the Pay Equity Act.

The Tribunal held that s. 8(2) cannot be relied upon because pay equity had not yet been achieved for all employees in the establishment, specifically the teachers.

The Tribunal also found that CUPE 1734 was not complicit in the Employer's contravention, as the union had attempted to negotiate maintenance and subsequently filed a complaint.

The Employer's application was dismissed and the Order confirmed, except for the requirement that the union post a notice.