- 注册
- 2002-10-07
- 消息
- 402,163
- 荣誉分数
- 76
- 声望点数
- 0
She claims the harassment began shortly after she was hired as part of the construction site cleanup crew.
The only woman on the crew, Belia Mejia says she struggled for six months, “Trying to fit in … trying to be one of the guys.”
It started with snide comments, Mejia alleges.
“They would call me ‘p—y’ all the time. It went too far, and when I told my boss what happened, he said he would talk to them. But nothing ever happened.”
She alleges the harassment continued, and, as detailed in a complaint filed in February with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, escalated to include physical threats, crude racist and sexist comments, and an allegation that two male co-workers had once followed her home “to check where I live.”
She quit her job in January and has not worked since.
According to the Human Rights Tribunal complaint, obtained by this newspaper, Mejia is now seeking $40,000 in damages from the construction company, Manotick-based Versatek Building Corp.
Mejia says she decided to comment publicly about her complaint, in part, to inspire others to stand up for their rights.
“This is not about me, because it’s not only me who is having this problem,” she said in an interview. “There are so many other people, and other women who are being treated like this every single day. It’s not fair, it’s not right and it needs to stop.”
None of Mejia’s claims has been tested by the Human Rights Tribunal and Versatek’s parent company, Bayview Kanata Holdings Ltd., denied the most serious allegations in a detailed response, filed with the tribunal and obtained by this newspaper, and dismissed other allegations as part of the “working culture.”
“Coarse language was not uncommon on the construction site. Many engaged in it, including the (complainant), without evident discomfort or complaint. … (She) gave every appearance of being comfortable hearing, and using language that some would consider offensive,” the company said in its response to the tribunal complaint.
When reached for comment Tuesday, David Law, a lawyer for the company, described the allegations as unsubstantiated.
“There is a process which will assess and determine the facts,” Law said in an email. “We believe that everyone concerned deserves fairness and due process. That process is underway with the Human Rights Tribunal, and we think it is inappropriate to comment on the matter elsewhere.”
The company’s tribunal filings allege Mejia missed a shift on Jan. 18, then arrived late the following day. The site superintendent directed a foreman to warn her about her “attendance problem.”
In an interview, Mejia said she refused to return to work because she felt unsafe. On Jan. 22, she sent a text to the superintendent, her boss, informing him she would not be returning to work because of sexual and racial harassment.
“This was the first time such a complaint had ever been made at the project, by the Applicant or anyone else,” the company claims.
Mejia said she formally complained on Jan. 10 (the company denies this) as the harassment allegedly escalated further.
The foreman and other workers, she claims, had for months been calling her a “hairy c—-a.” (A reference, in Spanish, to her genitals. Mejia immigrated to Canada from Nicaragua eight years ago.)
They repeatedly called her “Dora the Explorer,” and “p—y,” and denigrated her as “weak and lazy just for being a woman,” she alleges.
In late November, she claims, the foreman gave her phone number to a construction engineer, and another co-worker told her that two men from the crew had followed her to her home.
“For me that was creepy and since I already felt unsafe at work; they made me feel unsafe outside of work as well.”
Those claims are denied in the company’s response to the Human Rights Tribunal.
The foreman admitted only to calling her a “hairy c—-a,” but the company added in its response, “it is evident that the Applicant referred to (the foreman) with the same phrase.”
Mejia acknowledges she jokingly called the foreman and other male co-workers “p—y,” but said she did so to fit in with her all-male crew mates.
On Jan. 9, she claims, the harassment turned physical.
One of the workers began hitting her, at first playfully, on her hard hat. She told him to stop, and told the foreman, who she claims did not intervene. The worker then “slammed a heavy object on my head (still wearing my hard hat). I lost my temper … (the foreman) started laughing at me for my reaction.”
The company acknowledged the worker was “tapping” on her hard hat, but said, “There is no evidence of her being hit with a heavy object.” The company also claims the foreman did intervene and told the worker to stop.
In an interview, Mejia alleges the same worker once threw a hammer at her — “Not directly at me to hurt me, but to intimidate me,” she said.
“They would behave like teenagers, touching my hair. And when I would get upset they would just look at me like I was joking.
“Girls just want to work and it’s always people thinking we’re just a piece of meat,” said Mejia. “I felt guilty because it was like I let this go on for too long. How many women and girls go through this and they don’t say anything, because they need the paycheck.
“But one day, it was enough. I said, ‘I’m not coming back to work because I don’t feel safe.’”
That was Jan. 22. She has not worked since.
She first contacted the Ministry of Labour to lodge a formal complaint. According to the response filed by Bayview Kanata Holdings, Ltd., two ministry inspectors visited the site on Jan. 31 to investigate two workplace harassment complaints lodged by Mejia.
Bayview, in its tribunal filings, said it resolved an earlier complaint in December 2017 involving a new employee who was partnered with Mejia. That employee was fired in January after Mejia complained the worker made “uncomfortable and unwelcome” contact with Mejia through social media.
The ministry field visit report, included in the filings, stated:
“The employer had attempted to mitigate and address one case of workplace harassment brought to its attention. … Likewise, the employer has attempted to communicate with the complainant on multiple occasions to no avail, in order to commence an investigation into other allegations of workplace harassment.”
In its filings contesting Mejia’s claims, the company also said it enlisted a third-party investigation into her “treatment” at the work site, which included interviews with Mejia and with her male co-workers.
That investigation allegedly found that “coarse and sexualized language had occurred at the workplace, that it was inappropriate and that (Mejia) had been upset by it.”
The company said the foreman acknowledged the language used in the workplace, “and specifically in communications by (the foreman) and (Mejia) was inappropriate.”
The filing states the company “disciplined (the foreman) and engaged outside parties to train employees about appropriate language and conduct in the workplace.”
The filing further said Mejia “was clearly an active participant in the workplace culture. … (She) did not voice a concern at all, until being appropriately disciplined for attendance issues … (and) raised the concern only after leaving the workplace.”
The filing alleges she “has embellished her account with false accusations.”
Mejia, in an interview, said she stands by every aspect of her story.
Included in her tribunal filing is Versatek’s own workplace violence and harassment policy, an extensive 14-page document containing the company’s code of conduct and outlining the process for employees to lodge complaints. The company claims Mejia did not follow that reporting protocol.
According to Versatek’s policy, harassment is defined by behaviour that “intimidates, isolates … (can) include racism or matters involving gender or sexual orientation … (and) often involves repeated words or actions, or a pattern of behaviours, against a worker or group of workers in the workplace that are unwelcome.”
Mejia included voice recordings and text message exchanges with her boss and the site foreman to support her complaint.
In its response to the Human Rights Tribunal, the company also references text messages, presenting an exchange between Mejia and (the foreman) as evidence of the “standard character of their communications and their relationship.”
Mejia texted the foreman while he was off work on bereavement leave in December 2017: “We miss you p—y,” she texted to him. “This place is funny when you are here.”
The company states in its Human Rights Tribunal filing that Mejia and the foreman “were participants in an overly-informal workplace atmosphere where coarse language was commonly used. (Mejia) gave no indication she was uncomfortable with it … (Mejia) may have been the recipient of unwelcome sexualized comment, but her own conduct made it difficult for others to recognize that it was unwelcome.”
Mejia, in an interview, said that view is difficult to accept.
“Emotionally, this made me feel useless,” she wrote to the Human Rights Tribunal. “They made me feel as if I didn’t matter and that I was just a cleaner. That my English wasn’t good enough.
“They made me feel embarrassed and ashamed for being a woman, they made me feel as if I couldn’t defend myself just because they had more power and strength than me.
“I felt like I didn’t fit in. Even when they would laugh at me, I would laugh with them just to try to fit in. I would work alongside them to make myself appear ‘strong’ like them.
“I would go back home feeling no respect for myself, I would cry in my car just thinking about their comments and I would think, ‘Why did I let this happen to me?’”
ahelmer@postmedia.com
Twitter.com/helmera
查看原文...
The only woman on the crew, Belia Mejia says she struggled for six months, “Trying to fit in … trying to be one of the guys.”
It started with snide comments, Mejia alleges.
“They would call me ‘p—y’ all the time. It went too far, and when I told my boss what happened, he said he would talk to them. But nothing ever happened.”
She alleges the harassment continued, and, as detailed in a complaint filed in February with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, escalated to include physical threats, crude racist and sexist comments, and an allegation that two male co-workers had once followed her home “to check where I live.”
She quit her job in January and has not worked since.
According to the Human Rights Tribunal complaint, obtained by this newspaper, Mejia is now seeking $40,000 in damages from the construction company, Manotick-based Versatek Building Corp.
Mejia says she decided to comment publicly about her complaint, in part, to inspire others to stand up for their rights.
“This is not about me, because it’s not only me who is having this problem,” she said in an interview. “There are so many other people, and other women who are being treated like this every single day. It’s not fair, it’s not right and it needs to stop.”
None of Mejia’s claims has been tested by the Human Rights Tribunal and Versatek’s parent company, Bayview Kanata Holdings Ltd., denied the most serious allegations in a detailed response, filed with the tribunal and obtained by this newspaper, and dismissed other allegations as part of the “working culture.”
“Coarse language was not uncommon on the construction site. Many engaged in it, including the (complainant), without evident discomfort or complaint. … (She) gave every appearance of being comfortable hearing, and using language that some would consider offensive,” the company said in its response to the tribunal complaint.
When reached for comment Tuesday, David Law, a lawyer for the company, described the allegations as unsubstantiated.
“There is a process which will assess and determine the facts,” Law said in an email. “We believe that everyone concerned deserves fairness and due process. That process is underway with the Human Rights Tribunal, and we think it is inappropriate to comment on the matter elsewhere.”
The company’s tribunal filings allege Mejia missed a shift on Jan. 18, then arrived late the following day. The site superintendent directed a foreman to warn her about her “attendance problem.”
In an interview, Mejia said she refused to return to work because she felt unsafe. On Jan. 22, she sent a text to the superintendent, her boss, informing him she would not be returning to work because of sexual and racial harassment.
“This was the first time such a complaint had ever been made at the project, by the Applicant or anyone else,” the company claims.
Mejia said she formally complained on Jan. 10 (the company denies this) as the harassment allegedly escalated further.
The foreman and other workers, she claims, had for months been calling her a “hairy c—-a.” (A reference, in Spanish, to her genitals. Mejia immigrated to Canada from Nicaragua eight years ago.)
They repeatedly called her “Dora the Explorer,” and “p—y,” and denigrated her as “weak and lazy just for being a woman,” she alleges.
In late November, she claims, the foreman gave her phone number to a construction engineer, and another co-worker told her that two men from the crew had followed her to her home.
“For me that was creepy and since I already felt unsafe at work; they made me feel unsafe outside of work as well.”
Those claims are denied in the company’s response to the Human Rights Tribunal.
The foreman admitted only to calling her a “hairy c—-a,” but the company added in its response, “it is evident that the Applicant referred to (the foreman) with the same phrase.”
Mejia acknowledges she jokingly called the foreman and other male co-workers “p—y,” but said she did so to fit in with her all-male crew mates.
On Jan. 9, she claims, the harassment turned physical.
One of the workers began hitting her, at first playfully, on her hard hat. She told him to stop, and told the foreman, who she claims did not intervene. The worker then “slammed a heavy object on my head (still wearing my hard hat). I lost my temper … (the foreman) started laughing at me for my reaction.”
The company acknowledged the worker was “tapping” on her hard hat, but said, “There is no evidence of her being hit with a heavy object.” The company also claims the foreman did intervene and told the worker to stop.
In an interview, Mejia alleges the same worker once threw a hammer at her — “Not directly at me to hurt me, but to intimidate me,” she said.
“They would behave like teenagers, touching my hair. And when I would get upset they would just look at me like I was joking.
“Girls just want to work and it’s always people thinking we’re just a piece of meat,” said Mejia. “I felt guilty because it was like I let this go on for too long. How many women and girls go through this and they don’t say anything, because they need the paycheck.
“But one day, it was enough. I said, ‘I’m not coming back to work because I don’t feel safe.’”
That was Jan. 22. She has not worked since.
She first contacted the Ministry of Labour to lodge a formal complaint. According to the response filed by Bayview Kanata Holdings, Ltd., two ministry inspectors visited the site on Jan. 31 to investigate two workplace harassment complaints lodged by Mejia.
Bayview, in its tribunal filings, said it resolved an earlier complaint in December 2017 involving a new employee who was partnered with Mejia. That employee was fired in January after Mejia complained the worker made “uncomfortable and unwelcome” contact with Mejia through social media.
The ministry field visit report, included in the filings, stated:
“The employer had attempted to mitigate and address one case of workplace harassment brought to its attention. … Likewise, the employer has attempted to communicate with the complainant on multiple occasions to no avail, in order to commence an investigation into other allegations of workplace harassment.”
In its filings contesting Mejia’s claims, the company also said it enlisted a third-party investigation into her “treatment” at the work site, which included interviews with Mejia and with her male co-workers.
That investigation allegedly found that “coarse and sexualized language had occurred at the workplace, that it was inappropriate and that (Mejia) had been upset by it.”
The company said the foreman acknowledged the language used in the workplace, “and specifically in communications by (the foreman) and (Mejia) was inappropriate.”
The filing states the company “disciplined (the foreman) and engaged outside parties to train employees about appropriate language and conduct in the workplace.”
The filing further said Mejia “was clearly an active participant in the workplace culture. … (She) did not voice a concern at all, until being appropriately disciplined for attendance issues … (and) raised the concern only after leaving the workplace.”
The filing alleges she “has embellished her account with false accusations.”
Mejia, in an interview, said she stands by every aspect of her story.
Included in her tribunal filing is Versatek’s own workplace violence and harassment policy, an extensive 14-page document containing the company’s code of conduct and outlining the process for employees to lodge complaints. The company claims Mejia did not follow that reporting protocol.
According to Versatek’s policy, harassment is defined by behaviour that “intimidates, isolates … (can) include racism or matters involving gender or sexual orientation … (and) often involves repeated words or actions, or a pattern of behaviours, against a worker or group of workers in the workplace that are unwelcome.”
Mejia included voice recordings and text message exchanges with her boss and the site foreman to support her complaint.
In its response to the Human Rights Tribunal, the company also references text messages, presenting an exchange between Mejia and (the foreman) as evidence of the “standard character of their communications and their relationship.”
Mejia texted the foreman while he was off work on bereavement leave in December 2017: “We miss you p—y,” she texted to him. “This place is funny when you are here.”
The company states in its Human Rights Tribunal filing that Mejia and the foreman “were participants in an overly-informal workplace atmosphere where coarse language was commonly used. (Mejia) gave no indication she was uncomfortable with it … (Mejia) may have been the recipient of unwelcome sexualized comment, but her own conduct made it difficult for others to recognize that it was unwelcome.”
Mejia, in an interview, said that view is difficult to accept.
“Emotionally, this made me feel useless,” she wrote to the Human Rights Tribunal. “They made me feel as if I didn’t matter and that I was just a cleaner. That my English wasn’t good enough.
“They made me feel embarrassed and ashamed for being a woman, they made me feel as if I couldn’t defend myself just because they had more power and strength than me.
“I felt like I didn’t fit in. Even when they would laugh at me, I would laugh with them just to try to fit in. I would work alongside them to make myself appear ‘strong’ like them.
“I would go back home feeling no respect for myself, I would cry in my car just thinking about their comments and I would think, ‘Why did I let this happen to me?’”
ahelmer@postmedia.com
Twitter.com/helmera
查看原文...
