Labelle v. Mega International Air Services

Labelle v. Mega International Air Services Collection Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Date 2025-04-30 Neutral citation 2025 CHRT 34 File number(s) HR-DP-2885-22 Decision-maker(s) Hadjis, Athanasios Decision type Decision Grounds Sexual Orientation Decision Content Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Tribunal canadien des droits de la personne Citation: 2025 CHRT 34 Date: April 30, 2025 File No. : HR-DP-2885-22 Between: Steven Labelle Complainant - and - Canadian Human Rights Commission Commission - and - Mega International Air Services Respondent Decision Member: Athanasios Hadjis [1] Steven Labelle, the Complainant, has not communicated with the Tribunal since March 11, 2024. For the following reasons, I am dismissing the complaint as abandoned. [2] Mr. Labelle filed his complaint against the Respondent, Mega International Air Services, on March 28, 2019. He alleged that he was harassed on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination while employed by the Respondent. The Canadian Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) referred Mr. Labelle’s complaint to the Tribunal for inquiry on October 19, 2022. The Commission informed the Tribunal that it would not participate in the Tribunal process. [3] On December 30, 2022, the Tribunal sent a letter to the parties setting out timelines to file their disclosure documents, as required by Rules 18 to 20 of the Canadian Human Rights

Tribunal Rules of Procedure, 2021 (SOR/2021-137) (the “Rules”). Mr. Labelle was directed to file his Statement of Particulars (SOP) by February 8, 2023. The letter set out what the SOP had to include, namely a list of any documents that relate to any fact, issue or remedy in the case and a list of witnesses he intends to call, including a summary of their anticipated testimony. He also had to specify the remedies he sought and provide a detailed breakdown of financial losses, expenses to date, and other relief claimed under s. 53(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985 c. H-6, including dates of employment, wages received or claimed, and any other amounts claimed. The letter specified that he had to disclose any documents in support of the remedies claimed, including paystubs, T4s, and income tax returns. [4] On February 13, 2023, the Respondent informed the Tribunal that it had not yet received Mr. Labelle’s SOP. [5] On February 16, 2023, the Tribunal wrote an email to Mr. Labelle to remind him that his SOP was overdue and to ask him to contact the Tribunal as soon as possible to advise if he needed an extension to file it or if he wanted to withdraw his complaint. He replied the same day saying that he wanted an extension. The Tribunal granted the extension until March 8, 2023. [6] On March 14, 2023, the Respondent informed the Tribunal that it had still not

received Mr. Labelle’s SOP. The Respondent noted that, according to Rule 9, the Tribunal may dismiss a complaint if a party does not comply with the Rules or an order of a Tribunal panel. The Respondent asked that the complaint be dismissed. The Respondent’s email was forwarded to Mr. Labelle. [7] On March 15, 2023, Mr. Labelle sent an email to the Tribunal apologizing and noting that he was waiting to receive his witness’s statement. [8] On March 30, 2023, the Respondent again informed the Tribunal that it had not received any documents from Mr. Labelle and reiterated its request that the complaint be dismissed for non-compliance with the Rules. [9] On May 2, 2023, on my instruction, the Tribunal Registry sent an email to Mr. Labelle directing him to inform the Tribunal by May 5, 2023, of his intentions with respect to his complaint and the filing of the SOP. The email advised him that even if he could not finalize his witness list at that time, he was still required to file the SOP by the dates given by the Tribunal. He could ask to amend his witness list later if needed. [10] On the same day, May 2, 2023, Mr. Labelle responded that he wished to go forward with the complaint, repeating that he was still waiting on his witness statements. [11] On May 4, 2023, Mr. Labelle filed a digital photo of a handwritten page containing five paragraphs. It outlined the incidents of

harassment that he alleges took place at the Respondent’s workplace. [12] On May 8, 2023, the Respondent wrote to the Tribunal, noting that the photographed document still failed to contain a list of documents, a list of witnesses with their anticipated testimonies, a statement of the remedies Mr. Labelle is seeking, and a detailed calculation of the alleged financial loss, with supporting documents. The Respondent again asked that the complaint be dismissed for non-compliance with the Rules. [13] On May 23, 2023, I held a case management conference call with Mr. Labelle and the Respondent’s lawyer. I described to Mr. Labelle the documents and information that Rule 18 requires him to provide as part of his SOP. I informed him that the summaries of his witnesses’ testimonies need only be a few lines in length. He did not need to meet with them to obtain detailed statements or affidavits. I granted him an extension until June 7, 2023, to file the remaining SOP material. I denied the Respondent’s request that the complaint be dismissed. [14] On June 6, 2023, Mr. Labelle sent an email stating that he did not have any documents. He said that he was not given anything when he was “fired or while being harassed” and that everything should be on camera at the airport. He stated that he had two witnesses and gave the full name of one of them. He only provided the first name of the

other. He concluded the email by saying that he was seeking “financial compensation for trauma/pain and suffering and potential lost wages.” He did not attach any documents or information supporting his claim. [15] The following day, June 7, 2023, Mr. Labelle sent another email, which was one sentence long. It recounted an additional fact relating to the allegation of harassment. No other information or document was included. [16] The same day, the Respondent wrote to the Tribunal and observed that the anticipated testimony of the witnesses was still missing, the statement of remedies was vague and insufficient, and there was no calculation of the alleged loss or detail about the expenses. The Respondent noted that despite the repeated opportunities given to Mr. Labelle to follow the Rules and the Tribunal’s directions, he still did not comply. The Respondent repeated its request that the complaint be dismissed. [17] On June 13, 2023, on my instruction, the Tribunal Registry sent a detailed letter by email to Mr. Labelle. It clearly and explicitly identified the information and documents he was still required to provide to comply with the Rules. It explained that the full name of his witnesses should be given along with a short summary of what Mr. Labelle anticipates they will say. Given that he was seeking financial compensation, he was required to specify both the nature and

the amount of the compensation sought. As for documents, although he said that he did not have any relating to the harassment incidents, he still needed to disclose documents about the financial compensation he was seeking, such as those that would support his claim of wage loss. The letter included links to the Tribunal’s website for each item, offering clear explanations and practical examples to guide him in meeting the requirements. [18] I again denied the Respondent’s request to dismiss the complaint for non-compliance with the Rules. However, the letter clearly warned Mr. Labelle that unless he provided the missing information and completed his SOP by June 26, 2023, his complaint would not proceed any further and could be dismissed. [19] Mr. Labelle did not respond to this email. [20] On July 5, 2023, the Respondent renewed its request for the complaint to be dismissed. The Respondent’s email was forwarded to Mr. Labelle. On July 17, 2023, on my instruction, the Tribunal Registry sent Mr. Labelle a letter informing him that the Respondent’s request for dismissal was once again denied, as it was not yet clear that he had abandoned his complaint. However, Mr. Labelle was clearly advised that, should he fail to follow up, the Tribunal would consider the complaint abandoned and proceed to dismiss it. Despite this notice, the Tribunal did not receive any further communication

from Mr. Labelle. [21] On February 26, 2024, the Tribunal sent an email to Mr. Labelle noting that he had not communicated with the Tribunal since June 8, 2023, and reminding him of the Tribunal’s previous notice that if he did not file the missing information, his complaint would be dismissed. He was directed to provide the required information by March 1, 2024, failing which the complaint would be dismissed as having been abandoned. [22] On March 11, 2024, Mr. Labelle sent the following email to the Tribunal: I don't understand what you want from me? I have given all the information many times and still being berated for more. Literally everything is on camera as this happened and an international airport! Pull the video footage! ( or did they delete it?) I'm sick of having to jump thru the same hoops over and over with nothing happening!!! This is absolute bullshit! I'm the one that was hurt in this situation and now feeling harassed over again. Like I don't know what you need!? I just want this put behind me and move on with my life! So either do something about a company that is hiding behind red tape and condones this behavior or just drop it! This is going to far and for what? My head and heartache and piling up legal bills and their end?? [23] On March 12, 2024, the Tribunal responded by email to Mr. Labelle and attached a copy of the Tribunal’s letter of June 13, 2023.

The Tribunal reminded Mr. Labelle that the attached letter explained in detail the material that he had to provide to move his case forward. He was reminded that, without this material, the case would not advance and would eventually be dismissed. The Tribunal asked Mr. Labelle to review the letter and follow up on the directions. He was also advised that if he required any further assistance or clarification, he could contact the Tribunal Registry at his convenience. [24] On March 12, 2024, following up on that day’s email from the Tribunal, the Respondent sent an email to the Tribunal and to Mr. Labelle noting the numerous times that the Tribunal advised Mr. Labelle of what he needed to do, failing which his complaint would eventually be dismissed. The Respondent submitted yet again that the case should be dismissed due to Mr. Labelle’s failure to comply with the Tribunal’s “very reasonable directions and several corresponding requests.” [25] Mr. Labelle did not respond to either of the emails of March 12, 2024. The Tribunal has not received any communication from Mr. Labelle since his email of March 11, 2024, in which he expressed frustration with the Tribunal’s request for information and indicated that he considered his submission complete. [26] Mr. Labelle has repeatedly failed to comply with the Tribunal’s directions despite multiple reminders, clear explanations of

required actions, and invitations to seek assistance of the Tribunal Registry should he need help with providing the requested documents and information. [27] It is up to complainants to advance their cases (Towedo v. Correctional Service of Canada, 2024 CHRT 6 at paras 4–5). Despite numerous opportunities to provide the requested information and documents and warnings of the consequences should he fail to do so, Mr. Labelle’s continued non-compliance reflects a lack of commitment to moving the proceedings forward. I am satisfied that Mr. Labelle does not intend to move his case forward and has abandoned the complaint. In accordance with Rule 9, the complaint should be dismissed. ORDER [28] The complaint is dismissed. The Tribunal Registry will close the file and provide a copy of this ruling to the parties. Signed by Athanasios Hadjis Tribunal Member City, Province April 30, 2025 Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Parties of Record File No. : HR-DP-2885-22 Style of Cause: Steven Labelle v. Mega International Air Services Decision of the Tribunal Dated: April 30, 2025 Steven Labelle , for himself Paul M. Pulver , for the Respondent