HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL of ONTARIO

Transcription

1 HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL of ONTARIO Page 25

2 Legislative Authority: HRTO The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) is established under the Ontario Human Rights Code. Since June 2008, all claims of discrimination under the Code have been dealt with through applications filed with the HRTO. The HRTO s primary role is to provide an expeditious and accessible process for resolving those applications through voluntary mediation or, where the dispute is not resolved through mediation, a hearing and an enforceable decision. Operational Highlights: HRTO HRTO focused on tribunal modernization and external service delivery. The tribunal continued to reduce its active caseload. HRTO is also working closely with stakeholders to address recommendations of the Pinto Report. Tribunal Modernization The Pinto Report reviewing Ontario s human rights system reforms was released in November Although the report was generally positive about the new system, it contained a number of recommendations specific to the HRTO. In response to the recommendations, the HRTO has changed processes, modified forms and, in April 2014, will be introducing new practice directions for parties. Practice directions give practical advice on how to interpret tribunal rules. Work to revise the application and response forms to reduce duplication and length and increase accessibility continues. The HRTO also posted more accessible Word versions of the application forms to its website. External Service Delivery HRTO is working with the Human Rights Commission and the Human Rights Legal Support Centre to further improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the human rights system in Ontario. Page 26

3 Service Standards: HRTO The first mediation date offered to parties will be scheduled to take place within 150 calendar days from the date the parties agree to mediation 80% of the time. Result: 88% The first hearing date offered to parties will be scheduled to take place within 180 calendar days from the date the application is ready to proceed to all hearings 80% of the time. Result: 37% The average number of days for this standard was 194 Decisions for hearing which take three days or less will be issued within 90 calendar days 80% of the time. Result: 71% The average number of days for this standard was 83 Decisions for hearings which take longer than three days will be issued within 180 calendar days 80% of the time. Result: 54% The average number of days for this standard was 169 Statistics and Commentary: HRTO Caseload The HRTO reduced its caseload in There were 3,061 open applications at the start of the fiscal year. By year-end, that number had been reduced by 67 cases to 2,994 (with 421 of these remaining cases deferred pending the outcome of some other proceeding outside the HRTO). This was accomplished in spite of an increase of 405 applications over last fiscal year Applications received 3,242 2,837 2,740 Cases reactivated Cases closed 3,341 3,105 3,364 Active cases at year-end 2,994 3,061 3,302 Page 27

4 Of the cases closed in fiscal where the application was accepted, 1,601 (64 per cent) were closed within one year. The average time from application acceptance to closure was 363 days, with a median of 263 days. A geographical breakdown of applications based on the applicant s postal code Eastern (K) 13% 12% 11% Central (L) 38% 37% 37% Toronto (M) 24% 24% 25% Western (N) 17% 19% 18% Northern (P) 6% 6% 6% Other 2% 3% 2% Percentage of applications based on each of the five social areas covered by the Code. Note that while most applications only allege discrimination in respect of one social area, some are based on more than one, so the total exceeds 100 per cent by a small amount. SOCIAL AREA Employment 74% 77% 76% Goods, Services and Facilities 22% 21% 21% Housing 6% 6% 5% Contracts 1% 1% 1% Membership in a Vocation Ass n 1% 1% 1% No Social Area 2% 2% 1% Percentage of applications in which each prohibited ground under the Code is raised. Because many applications claim discrimination based on more than one ground, the totals in the chart far exceed 100%. Ground Disability 54% 57% 54% Reprisal 27% 25% 25% Sex, Pregnancy and Gender Identity 25% 22% 25% Race 22% 22% 19% Colour 16% 15% 13% Age 13% 15% 14% Ethnic Origin 17% 15% 15% Place of Origin 15% 13% 13% Page 28

5 Family Status 13% 10% 8% Ancestry 13% 11% 9% Sexual Solicitation or Advances 8% 6% 5% Creed 8% 6% 7% Marital Status 8% 5% 8% Sexual Orientation 8% 4% 4% Association 5% 4% 3% Citizenship 6% 4% 4% Record of Offences 3% 4% 3% Gender identity* 7% 2% Gender expression* 5% 1% Receipt of Public Assistance 2% 2% 1% No grounds 4% 2% 3% * Bill 33, An Act to amend the Human Rights Code with respect to gender identity and gender expression, came into force on June 19, 2012, adding these two grounds. The HRTO application form was amended to reflect these new grounds in late June Mediation Mediations held 1,562 1,283 1,635 Settled at the mediation 59% 60% 62% Applicant representation Lawyer / paralegal Other representative Self-represented Respondent representation Lawyer / paralegal Other representative Self-represented Hearings and Decisions 63% 3% 34% 85% 2% 13% 50% 3% 47% 85% 2% 13% 42% 4% 55% 84% 2% 14% Type of Decision Final decision on the merits Discrimination found Discrimination not found Dismissal on a preliminary basis (including following summary hearings) Deferrals Page 29

6 *Other procedural issues Reconsideration Breach of settlement decision *Includes instances such as jurisdictional issues, where the matter was dealt with by another court, the granting or denying of adjournments or no response was filed. The HRTO also issued 1,794 Case Assessment Directions dealing with various procedural issues. Transitional Applications and Commission Referred Complaints June 2008 amendments to the Code established the new human rights system and included a mechanism for dealing with complaints still pending at the Ontario Human Rights Commission. For a period of one year, the complainant could bring the complaint to the HRTO by filing an application under section 53 of the Code. The HRTO received almost 2,000 such applications. As well, the Commission continued to refer complaints to the HRTO until December 31, Most of the Transition Applications and Commission Referred Complaints have been resolved. At the end of fiscal , the open caseload was: Transitional Applications 16 open cases: 2 were pending final decision 12 were deferred pending the outcome of some other process 1 was at the hearing stage 1 was combined with s.34 applications Commission Referred Complaints 2 open cases: 1 for monitoring 1 group of cases being case managed for outstanding issues (special diet files processed as one case) Page 30