Sandhu v. Regional Municipality of Peel Police Service Board et al. Schedule A The Parties 1.

I, Baljiwan Singh (BJ) Sandhu, am the applicant herein. I am a member of the Peel Regional Police Service (PRPS) holding the rank of Detective Sergeant, assigned badge #1477.I complain of discrimination on the grounds of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour and ethnic origin in respect of my application to be promoted to the rank of Inspector. 2. The respondent Jennifer Evans is the Chief of Police of the PRPS responsible in law for the training, supervision and discipline of members of the PRPS. 3. The respondent Regional Municipality of Peel Police Services Board (Board) is a police services board pursuant to the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.15 as amended, and is the body responsible in law for the acts and omissions of its members, employees and agents.

My Background 4. Iam a resident of Mississauga, Ontario and a 24-year veteran of the PRPS.

5. I was born on January 16, 1962 in Muktsar, India. I was graduated with a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the University of Rajasthan. I immigrated to Canada on August 19, 1981 and became a Canadian citizen on April 16, 1985. My service with the PRPS commenced on February 6, 1989 when I was a Recruit Constable, and the first Punjabi officer assigned to District 2, City of Brampton. My Continuous Struggle 6. From the outset and throughout the course of my policing service, I have faced a steady barrage of humiliation, embarrassment, hurtfulness and harassment of a discriminatory nature from fellow members of the PRPS. Some examples are listed below: (a) During my basic training, I attended a presentation about operations of the Communications Bureau. The speaker stated that, in the future, current police officers would be replaced by women and Pakis. The rest of the class looked at me to see my reaction. Hurt and embarrassed as I was, it was all I could do to try and appear outwardly composed; Early in my career, when I was assigned to 21 Division, I was frequently greeted by fellow officers who would mimic my accent. It reached the point where I felt that I was an ethnic punching bag, yet I soldiered on;

(b)

(c)

Once,I walked into the gym at Headquarters full of officers, one of whom shouted: Hey, no one called a cab! The room erupted with laughter. It was a most distressing occasion for me. I momentarily swallowed my dignity and forced myself to laugh in an effort to endure this blatant racial slur; When I was assigned to the Directed Policing Unit at 21 Division, fellow officers were joking and skeptical. I was paired with an officer of Scottish heritage. Our team was referred to as the Braveheart-Gandhi team, a frequent reminder that I was considered an outsider; In the summer of 2001, while a member of Intelligence Services, a junior, turbaned South Asian constable was assigned to work alongside me. Sadly, we were taunted as being the temple twins, temple patrol unit and tea-totters. The post 9/11 era was an especially difficult time for us because of increased racial intolerance; I was told that a number of Command Officers were in the Pearson Airport Division boardroom managing the response to the Air France crash in August 2005, where I was one of the responding units, and that someone compared me to the character of Gunga Din. Thereafter, the officer who related that episode to me continually addressed me as Gangi, much to my dismay and objection; and, While investigating a routine motor vehicle collision involving a police vehicle and a civilian in September 2007, as required by procedure the Duty Inspector was called. The Duty Inspector commented in front of me and two other officers that there should not be any issues, unlike incidents involving South Asians who lie all the time. This was another occasion that was insulting and embarrassing.

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

7. As indicated above, the foregoing are only some examples of what I was forced to endure over the course of my career. Despite these challenges, I persevered and believe that I have demonstrated that my service to the PRPS has been and continues to be exemplary.

Peel Demographics and My Special Assignments 8. As a backdrop to this complaint, the demographic makeup of the Regional Municipality of Peel should be noted. It is a Region composed of relatively sizeable populations of persons of South Asian, Black, Chinese and other visible minority extractions. Indeed, the visible minority population of the Region currently comprises 57 percent of the whole. The Caucasian segment is now the minority.

9. In the context of the Regions demographics, Ibelieve that I have been an invaluable resource to the PRPS. Iam proficient in South Asian languages, specifically Punjabi, Hindi and Urdu. These linguistic abilities and my cultural background were recognized as significant assets by the Service early in my career. I was able to make a myriad of contributions by assisting various PRPS investigative bureaux to solve complex cases, involving numerous secondments, some of them lengthy. 10. The PRPS was happy to make use of me in these unique and special assignments, however, my commanding officers were not interested in my career development. Courses, which were readily available to my contemporary officers, were denied to me despite my numerous requests. For example, I did not complete the mandated Constable Training Program as I never received the final Advanced Patrol Training course. I further did not receive courses such as General Investigative Techniques, and Interviewing Techniques, which would have immensely enhanced my knowledge at a timely juncture during my numerous secondments to investigative bureaux. 11. In my six years with Intelligence Services (March 2000 to April 2006), I was given only two performance evaluations. In my three and one-half years with the Diversity Relations Unit (DRU), I received no performance evaluation. 12. I did not realize at the time that this meant that I was not viewed as an integral member of the PRPS, but as an outlier who would essentially stagnate in his career.

Some Career Highlights 13. Reference has already been made to my cultural acumen and linguistic abilities and their utilization by the PRPS. My knowledge of the Regions various communities and the contacts I cultivated over the years stood me in excellent stead to produce effective results and resolutions for the Service on numerous occasions. 14. The following list is a sampling of some of my contributions over the years: (a) In 1990, Superintendent OToole, whose strategy as part of a community-based policing initiative was to focus on the Sikh and Black communities in 21 Division, selected me to be paired with other officers to map religious institutions, businesses and community service groups and to identify and liaise with the informal leadership of these communities. Superintendent OToole was very appreciative of my assistance in developing a demographic profile of the community; In late 1991, I was assigned to the newly-formed Neighbourhood Policing Unit of 21 Division. I started to assist the Division with organizing the policing of summer community events such as sports tournaments by establishing liaisons with Sikh sports clubs and religious institutions. These tournaments attracted thousands of spectators and often ended up in spontaneous drunken brawls.

(b)

4 In order to manage my role effectively, it was necessary to develop a thorough understanding of the sports club memberships and their rivalries. It was a difficult challenge, particularly since I had to do it alone no one else was interested in doing it. As it happened, I carried the responsibility for organizing the policing of these events until 2006; (c) Within the South Asian community, in 1992 I started to act as a role model in assisting PRPS in recruiting minorities; I was temporarily transferred to the Homicide Bureau for several months in 199293 to assist in investigating two murders that were mired in the religious politics of the secessionist Sikh movement and pro-India government supporters. With my assistance, both cases were concluded. This was only one of numerous times that I was transferred to the Homicide and Missing Persons Bureau. I was involved in all investigations relating to South Asian homicides from 1992 to 2004. In fact, many bureaux of the PRPS sought my services, including the Criminal Investigation Bureaux, Fraud Bureau, Auto Theft Bureau and various Divisional Uniform Bureaux. Moreover, my services were borrowed and utilized by other police services in Ontario and elsewhere as well; As a 1st Class Uniform Constable in 1997, while assigned to the newly-opened Malton Community Station, I was extensively sought out by the local South Asian and Black communities for resolution of their respective issues. I built an everlasting relationship with these ethnic communities while managing volatile situations at the local Sikh temples, Malton Community Centre and Westwood Mall. The Divisional Command relied heavily on my cultural knowledge and insight of the community issues; In a performance evaluation on June 16, 1998, it was written: Constable Sandhu attends the Divisions two temples on a regular basis and deals with a multitude of problems. The congregations at these temples amount to 30,000 citizens and without the efforts of this officer, the police service would have great difficulties; In the year 2000, I was assigned to work with a senior Detective to manage the South Asian intelligence portfolio. I acted as a resource for Chief Catney and then Superintendent Metcalf in order to resolve a number of potentially volatile situations within the Sikh community. In the post 9/11 era, Chief Catney maintained an open-door policy for me and the community leadership; The Humanitarian of the Year Award was bestowed upon me by the Knights of Columbus in April 2000;

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

I was the recipient of the Human Rights and Race Relations Gold Medal in March 2002; The President of the Coalition of Muslim Organizations wrote to me in 2003 expressing appreciation for establishing rapport between the PRPS and the Muslim organizations; On the basis of some sourced intelligence, in 2003 my partner and I developed and identified almost 40 persons from the local Indian community involved in trans-border drug trafficking trade. Due to operational constraints, the project was not moved forward; While a member of Intelligence Services in 2004, I served as a conduit and resource for the Chief and Chiefs Management Group in resolving numerous risky situations amongst factions of the Sikh, Muslim and Tamil communities. My achievements were founded upon information and intelligence I was able to assemble. I garnered the appreciation of community leaders and organizations which certainly was to the benefit of the PRPS; I was hand-picked in 2009 by Chief Metcalf to be assigned to the Diversity Relations Unit (DRU) with the duties of liaising with the leadership of the ethnic communities of Peel Region. I was also directed to serve as PRPSs first ethnic community media relations officer. At the outset, Chief Metcalf met with me respecting my role. Sadly, referring to the leadership of the minority communities, he told me to keepem away from me; During the time that I was with the DRU, I delivered hundreds of media interviews and presentations in order to raise the profile of the PRPS among the ethnic communities; In 2009, I received a letter of appreciation from the West End Buddhist Centre for addressing the issues raised in the aftermath of arson to Sinhalese properties; and In September of 2012, I was awarded the Queens Diamond Jubilee Medal for dedication to policing and public service.

(j)

(k)

(l)

(m)

(n)

(o)

(p)

15. As I have expressed, the above listing represents only a sampling of my contributions over the course of my policing career.

My Career Overview 16. Over the course of my policing career, I have been the recipient of a long list of community and public service awards (see Schedule B) and numerous accolades and commendations (see Schedule C), some of which I have detailed above. This litany of

6 awards, accolades and commendations were in my view justly earned as a result of my strong work ethic, my keen knowledge of the mosaic of the Peel community and my ability to take its pulse. I believe that I have made significant contributions to various bureaux of the PRPS and to other police forces in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond. I amcertain that I am widely respected as a stalwart by the populace of Peel Region. Notwithstanding these achievements, some of my immediate supervisors have failed to recognize them and undervalue the significance of my work, paying no attention to my career goals and development. 17. My assignment to the DRU commenced on January 4, 2009 and I was assured by Chief Metcalf that I would not be required for more than two years in that Unit. Having served those two years, I wanted to broaden my career development, but it seemed that no one was interested in assisting me in that regard. I was met with the question: Who is going to replace you?, as if to suggest that it was my sole and everlasting responsibility to be the ethnic representative of the PRPS. Ultimately, after three and one-half years at Diversity Relations, on June 6, 2012 I was transferred out of that Unit into the Airport Division.

The Events in Question My Application for Promotion to Inspector 18. Certain members of the PRPS have disparaged the attention I have paid to the ethnic communities on the basis that it does not represent real police work. This is so notwithstanding the countless requests and mandates of various PRPS bureaux and Chiefs of Police over the years. It appears that there is a culture of resentment by some aimed at those who have considered the special needs of the diverse Peel communities. Those who hold that view seem to believe that it is something that simply should not be done or is entirely unnecessary. Because I myself belong to one of those communities, it is submitted that the resentment is vicariously visited upon me one of them. 19. In the ensuing paragraphs, it will be chronicled that I applied for a promotion to the rank of Inspector. I was cautioned by certain superiors that unless I was to withdraw my application, I would receive a poor performance evaluation and that my promotion would be blocked. I stood firm, the poor performance evaluation came to pass and my promotion was blocked. 20. On January 18, 2013, the promotional process for five anticipated vacancies within the rank of Inspector was announced, which was later amended to include two further vacancies on March 7, 2013. Attaining this rank has been a long-held dream of mine. I felt that I had amassed the requisite skills and experience in order to be considered a viable candidate for a promotion. The notice itself indicated that the factors to be assessed included overall work experience, contribution to work environment, and core and enabling competencies applicable to the rank of Inspector. 21. I submitted my application online to my commanding officer and the Career Development Bureau (CDB) on February 1, 2013, enclosing a resume and a cover letter.

7 22. On February 19, 2013, I had a meeting with SuperintendentMacMullen, the then Superintendent for the Airport Division, which meeting was initiated and attended by my commanding officer, Inspector Mendyk. To my astonishment, I was told that my application for a promotion would not be endorsed. Further, I was told to withdraw the application by sending an e-mail to the CDB, as it would be better to withdraw it than be rejected. I declined to do so and indicated that I welcomed their assessment. 23. On February 28, 2013, in another meeting with Superintendent MacMullen and Inspector Mendyk, I was handed a negative promotional assessment. The assessment, while lauding my role as ambassador on behalf of the Police Service with the South Asian community in the Region and my unwavering commitment to the diverse communities served, indicated that I did not have sufficient experience as a front line uniform supervisor except for my assignments at Airport Division. It also stated that my 872 hours of experience acting as Inspector was while assigned to the DRU, rather than in an operational environment. Therefore, I was found not to have had the opportunity to experience, acquire and fully demonstrate the core and enabling competencies that are required for advancement to the next rank. 24. In the assessment, it was further recommended that I be exposed to the challenges faced by supervisory personnel at one of the four public Divisions to acquire the core skills and abilities required for promotion to the rank of Inspector. 25. Inspectors are senior officers and as such are covered under the Senior Officer Collective Agreement, whereas any officers of the rank of Staff Sergeant and lower would be covered under the Uniform Collective Agreement. Article 13.02 of the Uniform Collective Agreement refers to the Boards policy and procedures in respect of the promotional process, but the agreement itself does not express any criteria for promotion. It includes only the process to be followed for promotions. Similarly, the Senior Officer Collective Agreement does not express any criteria for promotion. 26. The Peel Regional Police Directive entitled Career Development Police Officers details criteria for eligibility for promotion to Sergeant or Detective which include a number of years of experience and attaining a certain percentage in directive examinations. The criteria on assessment of a candidate for short-listing include bureau postings, secondments, committee participation, expertise/training, acting rank, continuing education, community involvement and awards/commendations. However, this Directive does not address the criteria for promotion to the rank of Inspector. Similarly, the Peel Regional Police Directive entitled Promotion and Transfer Process for Members of the Senior Officers Association details a process for promotion but contains no benchmarks to be met for promotion. 27. There are certain competencies associated with the rank of Inspector. Specifically, these are: Conflict management; Critical judgement; Fostering relationships; Interpersonal skills; Leadership;

8 Organizational awareness and political astuteness; Planning and organizing; Process excellence; Resource management; and Risk management.

It is not indicated whether these are the criteria on which promotions to Inspector are based. In any event, none of these competencies require that I be a front line uniform supervisor. Overall, it is unclear what thecriteria for promotion of officers to the rank of Inspector are, and any criteriawhich exist are discretionary and, in this case, were used to discriminate against me. 28. On March 6, 2013, I was advised by a signed letter from Chief Evans that I was unsuccessful and would not be receiving an interview in the 2013 Inspector Promotional Process, but that I would be able to debrief with Inspector Beatty. I requested a debriefing on April 3, 2013 but to date I have not received one. 29. On March 25, 2013, the list of five newly-promoted Inspectors was released as well as three short-listed candidates who were officially promoted on April 11, 2013. These candidates held the same rank as I did, and while five Staff Sergeants had longer service time than I, three had less. 30. On April 17, 2013, although I did not agree with the suggestion that I did not have sufficient experience to be promoted to the rank of Inspector, I applied for a transfer to 21 Division, a general division of the Service. I had been in communication with the Superintendent of 21 Division, Superintendent Whyte, and she appeared supportive of my transfer. 31. On May 13, 2013, I was advised by Superintendent Whyte that my transfer could not be accommodated as the transfer capacity had been reached. 32. On May 24, 2013, I filed a formal grievance against the Board in respect of the Inspector promotion process. 33. On May 31, 2013, Chief Evans announced the establishment of a committee to review the Sergeant/Detective, Staff/Detective Sergeant and Inspector/Superintendent promotional processes to create an updated scoring matrix for future processes. I am not aware of an existing matrix used for promotion into the ranks of Inspector in particular and Senior Officers in general. 34. On June 4, 2013, Staff SuperintendentAsanin initiated a meeting with me. He advised that he had blocked my transfer to 21 Division as he felt that I could receive sufficient acting time while at the Airport Division. 35. In response to an email from Inspector Mendyk, I advised him on July 24, 2013 that I would be able to act for him during the months of October, November and December 2013. In the year 2013, I had received a total 72 hours of acting time, although I made myself available to act at every opportunity.

9 36. I formally requested acting time in an email to Superintendent Thorne on October 17, 2013, which resulted in a meeting with him to discuss my request on October 18, 2013. I was advised that until my grievance was concluded, I would not be receiving any acting time. 37. I reapplied for a transfer on October 31, 2013. This transfer was not recommended by Superintendent Thorne as he indicated on my application that it was recommended that I continue at Airport Division in order to become fully capable of carrying out a Uniform Staff Sergeants duties. 38. In casual conversation, Superintendent Thorne on November 10, 2013 advised that I would not get ahead with my application for transfer to 21 CIBand that he thought I was making a mistake. He indicated that any barriers to my advancement were owing to the grievance, although bizarrely, he stated that I would receive an interview for a transfer. Towards the end of the conversation, Superintendent Thorne remarked that I would not be able to go back to the DRU if I was promoted. I indicated that I found that acceptable. 39. On December 5, 2013, following an interview on November 28, 2013, I was informed that I would be transferred to 21 Division despite the fact that my supervisors did not recommend it. I commenced work as a DetectiveSergeant at 21 Division on December 18, 2013.

Evaluation 40. Officers of the PRPS are required to receive a Performance Appraisal and Development Plan (PADP) every year. I had not received a PADP since January 2009. 41. The purposes of the PADP are to improve performance management and to address individual development planning. Each PADP has a self evaluation component and an evaluation by a manager. I completed the self evaluation component on April 11, 2013 for the PADP dated January 16, 2012 to January 16, 2013. In the self evaluation, I indicated that I exceeded expectations in some categories and that I met expectations in others. 42. Inspector Mendyks evaluation of me was available for my review on August 6, 2013. The evaluation indicated that I was progressing in the following categories: achievement orientation, decision-making, inter-personal skills and process excellence, and that I met expectations in conflict management, developing self and others, leadership, planning and organizing, resource management and written skills. I was given an overall rating of progressing. 43. The comments of Inspector Mendyk in respect of areas where I was marked as progressing and my responses to his comments are as follows:

10
Competency Overall comments Inspector Mendyks comments My responses As I had not worked in a frontline operational capacity in several years, the volume of work and opportunity to demonstrate some of the performance dimensions were somewhat limited, and as such it would take me a longer period of time to meet standards. There were alleged deficiencies which became apparent on cell sheet audits. Further, there was a lack of innovative proposals from my unit. My assessment at the promotional review varies greatly from the comments made on my evaluation. Nowhere was it suggested that I was not meeting expectations in my role as Staff Sergeant.

Achievement orientation

The cell sheet audits are a force wide issue and it was unfair for him to single me out when this problem has permeated throughout the Service. Further, Inspector Mendyk had not asked me about any innovative initiatives or shared initiatives from other platoons. My platoon consistently maintained the highest statistics in the Airport Division. The issue about vacation and promotion took place outside the evaluation period. I found the Sergeant deserving of the time-off and in the end I forwent my own time-off in order to allow him that time. I recommended the Constable for the transfer because he was wellqualified for the position. There were no criteria which indicated that he had to be with the platoon for a certain period. Further, his comments about the big picture ignore the various diversity initiatives I have put forward. I conveyed the Inspectors suggestions to the officer but did not feel that I should be required to strong arm an officer into making modifications that he could not support. I believe that Inspector Mendyks judgement was clouded with respect to this officer as he had vandalized Inspector Mendyks car. Inspector Mendyk has never raised this issue with me. I believe that my officers have been consistently performing at a high level and producing quality results.

Decisionmaking

He critiqued my request to carry over one of my Sergeants vacation time because the Sergeant was unable to get his choice of vacation. He also questioned my positive endorsement for a transfer of a Constable to the Criminal Investigations Bureau who had only been with the platoon a short time. He indicated that I was unable to look at the big picture.

Inter-personal skills

I was criticized for not convincing an officer to amend his use of force report.

Process excellence

He indicated that I need to bring forward process improvement initiatives.

11 44. Inspector Mendyk had never brought any shortcomings to my attention prior to the application for promotion. In addition, no part of the PADP indicates that Inspector Mendyk had paid any attention to my performance from January 2012 to June 2012, nor was there any comment paying any heed to my developmental goals. The majority of the comments he made were based on examples which were outside the appraisal period. 45. I believe that this negative assessment was a clear attempt to systemically obstruct me from advancing to the Inspector rank. I further believe that the assessment was punitive and retaliatory in nature for having filed a grievance against the promotional process. The negative assessments and the increased scrutiny began only after I filed my grievance.

Grievance 46. My May 24, 2013 grievance in relation to the promotional process to the rank of Inspector is presently in its nascent stages, being reviewed by Chief Evans and scheduled for conciliation on February 19, 2014. I am not confident that this process will remedy my circumstances. I also intend to file a grievance in relation to the poor performance review. How I was Discriminated Against: 47. I believe that the respondents discriminated against me in respect of my application for promotion to the rank of Inspector on the grounds of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour and ethnic origin in the following ways: (a) Because of my ethnic background, characteristics, knowledge and abilities, I was constantly singled out by the management and various bureaux of the PRPS for special assignments and secondments involving members and groups within the diverse communities of Peel Region, the number and length of which assignments have compromised the further advancement of my policing career; In their negative promotional assessment, InspectorMendyk and Superintendent MacMullen refused to recognize my 872 hours acting as Inspector while assigned to the DRU rather than in an operational environment, indicating to me their view that my work in, and relating to, the diverse communities of Peel, which was successful likely because of my own ethnicity, and a major benefit to the PRPS, was not real police work; Any criteria for advancement are unknown and the promotional process appears arbitrary. If advancement to Inspector requires only general division experience and discounts diversity or community policing experience, the promotional criteria themselves are discriminatory;

(b)

(c)

12

(d)

To suggest that my 24-year sojourn with PRPS has not been real police work is simply to ignore my: Countless assignments and secondments to various investigative and other bureaux to help in solving crimes; Assisting with prosecutions; Mapping religious institutions, businesses and community groups as part of a community-based program; Organizing the policing of community events; Helping to recruit officers from minorities; Assisting other police forces; Solving, resolving and avoiding problems in the ethnic communities; Raising the profile of the Service within the ethnic communities by media interviews and presentations; Assisting Chief Catney from 2000 to 2006 by vetting his community appearances, his meetings with high profile politicians in various ethnic communities and interviews on multilingual news stations, hiring visible minority officers and informally resolving complaints from ethnic communities;and, Assisting Chief Metcalf by acting as the diversity relations policy source from 2009 to 2012.

The fact that many of my assignments made use of my ethnic qualities did not make it any less police work. To depreciate my services as a police officer defies logic and smacks of discrimination; (e) When I received the negative promotional evaluation from InspectorMendyk and Superintendent MacMullen, I felt a need to be transferred out of the Airport Division if I was to make any headway on a different path, and so I sought a transfer. I later learned that Staff SuperintendentAsanin blocked my transfer. This action prevented me from participating in a Region-wide shuffle. Instead I was forced to compete with other officers and interview for the position. Although I was successful, by blocking my transfer, Staff Superintendent Asanin delayed my transfer by over

13 six months. This is reflective of hisbias against visible minority officers which came home to roost with me personally in 2009 when he made reference to me to another Caucasian officer in respect of my promotion to Staff Sergeant as the best of a bad bunch; (f) By placing me in the DRU and prolonging my stay there, I was systematically denied workplace opportunities which might have permitted my advancement with a focus on the forms of policing which the PRPS considers to be front-line policing; Although my institutional loyalty to Chief Metcalf was absolute, I realize now that he was actually taking advantage of my ethnicity and the positive seeds I had sewn across Peels minorities, so that it would appear that the PRPS was constantly fostering racial harmony amongst and within the various ethnic communities, without him personally having to be bothered with any issues in that regard. All the while, he was quite prepared to have me remain in that role notwithstanding my aspirations for advancement; At this juncture, I believe that my ethnic attributes have been exploited by the respondents and the PRPS to the extent that it has prejudiced my policing career in a discriminatory fashion;and After filing a grievance on the basis of the discriminatory dismissal of my application, I received a negative PADP, have been denied acting time and found my transfers to 21 Division blocked. The negative PADP, in particular, was a clear attempt to systematically obstruct me from advancing to the rank of Inspector.Although I was ultimately able to transfer, I believe this harassment was to punish me for the exercise of my rights to grieve an unfair dismissal of my application.

(g)

(h)

(i)

How the Events Described Above Affected Me 48. I did not apply for the rank of Inspector with a sense of entitlement. I felt that my years of service and my contributions to the PRPS had made me a viable candidate. However, the application and its aftermath have turned out to be a humiliating experience. 49. I was handpicked by then Chief Metcalf to run the DRU not only because of my experience, but also because of my race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, and ethnic origin, and faced deliberate attempts to block transfer requests out of the Unit. I performed to the best of my ability at the DRU and was able to attain success in that role. Despite my achievements, the time I spent at DRU is being held against my advancement.

14 50. I feel degraded and victimized by the incident. My sense of dignity and self-respect has been severely compromised. 51. While at work, I feel demeaned and dejected, having been confronted by my superiors with comments which, on their face, appear to be praising my contributions to the diverse Peel communities but, in reality, are simply faint praise to deflect their agenda to keep me in my place. 52. Further, even after I attempted to rectify the situation within the organization, I feel that I am being punished for having filed a grievance. I feel frustrated and stressed by the harassment to drop the grievance in order to gain acting time and by my attempts at a transfer being blocked. 53. It causes me a great deal of consternation when I often think that I have devoted a generation of my life constantly working to enhance the image of the PRPS in the eyes of one of the most diverse populations in Canada, only to learn that my superiors do not attach any meaningful worth in police terms to my accomplishments. 54. It is a frequent source of humiliation and embarrassment for me that numerous community leaders in the Regions mosaic respect and admire my ability to always maintain an even hand, yet question why I am not being promoted further. The reality is that the PRPS is undervaluing my services and not giving me just credit for my professional achievements. 55. I have sleepless nights caused by a gnawing concern that my efforts over the course of my career, particularly relating to my work with minorities, have not been appreciated by the PRPS. It makes me doubt whether the senior management of the Service is genuinely dedicated to taking proactive steps to facilitate a harmonious existence amongst and within all sectors of the Peel population, with all having equal rights and responsibilities. In turn, it makes me wonder whether I, as a South Asian, can expect an equal opportunity for advancement within the PRPS. 56. I understand that the attempts to downplay my achievements have permeated the Service and I have lost standing amongst my peers and my subordinates. This loss of reputation has left me disheartened and lessened my own sense of worth. 57. I find that my mental well-being has been severely compromised owing to this experience. I am on edge and short-tempered while at work and am unable to relax when I am off duty. I have lost enjoyment in the work that I loved so much. 58. I also have lost income by not attaining the rank of Inspector in March or April 2013. 59. I expect to have further damages and out-of-pocket expenses, the particulars of which I will disclose as this case proceeds and prior to a hearing of this matter.

15 Remedies sought 60. I am claiming the following remedies pursuant to section 45.2 of the Ontario Human Rights Code: (a) (b) To be promoted to the rank of Inspector; monetary damages for discrimination, emotional pain and suffering, loss of reputation, and injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect, in the amount of $1,000,000; reimbursement for my out-of-pocket expenses including legal expenses for this application and these proceedings; the differential in salary from and after March 23, 2013 had I been treated fairly without discrimination and been promoted to the rank of Inspector; interest on the amounts above from the date I was told I should withdraw my application for promotion to Inspector; a letter of assurance from the respondents relating to future compliance with the Code; review and revision of any existing policies, protocols or procedures regarding the promotion of members of the PRPS; implementation of non-discrimination policies and procedures by the respondents; and, implementation of mandatory anti-discrimination and human rights training of members of the PRPS by the respondents, which training is to be monitored by the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)