Employment (Discrimination)

Whale v. Keele North Recycling, 2011 HRTO 1724 (CanLII)

[51] Considering the evidence as a whole, I conclude that it is more likely than not that the applicant, who had no reason to quit her employment and whom the respondents admit was competent and qualified for the work, was dismissed because of her sex. As Mr. Blair is admittedly a directing mind of the corporate respondent, the corporate respondent is liable for a breach of the Code (see s.46.3). In view of my finding that Mr. Di Battista influenced Mr. Blair’s decision, I find the personal respondent and the corporate respondent jointly and severally liable.

(...)

[53] The applicant’s evidence was that she had been hired as a full-time employee. She asserted that she would have worked a five-day week with twelve-hour days. She submitted two earnings statements and copies of two cheques from Keele North Recycling Inc., as well as her ROE and that of Mr. Craig. The material relating to the applicant establishes that, according to the respondents’ records, she worked 18.5 hours over two days, at a rate of $11.00 per hour. The earnings statements show no deductions from wages.

[54] The respondents consistently referred to the applicant’s employment as “part-time” but it appears that the employment might have better been described as casual, as it appears that days of employment were not scheduled very far in advance.

(...)

[67] The Tribunal makes the following order:

(a) Within 30 days of this Decision, the respondents shall pay $6390.00 to the applicant for loss of employment income form October 14, 2009 to March 15, 2010 inclusive. The personal and corporate respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay this amount.

(b) Within 30 days of this Decision, the respondents shall pay $10,000 to the applicant for violation of her inherent right to be free from discrimination, and for injury to her dignity. The personal and corporate respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay this amount. This award is an award in the nature of general damages for pain and suffering