Jamie Sarkonak: ‘Lolita Line’ school bus driver is not a victim of anti-trans discrimination

In 2025, a school bus driver serving Vaughan, Ont., placed a placard with the words “Lolita Line” in the windshield and wore a pink mini-skirt and over-the-knee nylons to pick up kids. Vigilant parents caught it on film and the driver was promptly dismissed. This, it turns out, wasn’t the end of the story: now, the driver, self-described as a “transgender woman,” is pursuing a human rights complaint — showing, once again, just how backwards that system is.

Sign In or Create an Account

The driver, identifiable only as L.Z., alleges that the York Catholic District School Board and employer Landmark Bus Lines committed “discrimination with respect to employment because of ethnic origin, gender identity, and sex.” The York Catholic District School Board confirmed on Tuesday that this complaint stemmed from the events above.

Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

The human rights complaint would have proceeded in secret were it not for L.Z.’s insistence on securing a publication ban, which was granted on Oct. 13. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario does not post upcoming hearings online, unlike its more transparent cousins in B.C., Alberta and Manitoba, so there would have been no realistic way for the public to know that it was on the docket.

The tribunal did, however, publish its decision to grant a publication ban protecting L.Z.’s identity on Oct. 23. According to the decision, L.Z. wanted a publication ban because “she is a transgender woman” and because the events at the heart of the complaint “have garnered negative media attention.”

“The applicant has faced threats to her safety and discriminatory labels due to transphobic stereotypes,” adds the decision.

It’s unclear whether this individual is mentally ill, simply engaging in a stunt to take advantage of an overzealous, unaccountable human rights system, or something else altogether. No rational adult would show up to a job with proximity to kids in a skimpy costume and a reference to a novel about the sexual abuse of a child by a middle-aged man … and then revive the controversy by engaging in lawfare.

The decision to protect L.Z.’s case with a publication ban came down to the privacy of the individual, which, in the tribunal’s view, outweighed the “public interest in a transparent human rights process.”

“The applicant argues that the only thing that has kept her safe is that her name and personal details have not been revealed,” reads the decision. “The applicant states that the events in the Application have been publicized in a manner that described her as a danger to the public because of her gender identity and negative stereotypes that have been associated with her identity.

“In addition, the applicant submits that she would be at risk of physical harm, intimidation, and harassment based on the commentary on social media and news outlets, if her identity and personal information are made public.”

The tribunal is already treating L.Z. like a victim, when it should be the other way around. It would have been impossible for Landmark Bus Lines and the York Catholic school board to allow L.Z. to continue working as a school bus driver — transgender or not — as a matter of student safety. Permitting sexually inappropriate behaviour to continue would have been asking for a national controversy while also opening the door to parent lawsuits.

Unfortunately, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario does not alert media or the public about requests for publication bans, which means that there is no way for interested parties to attempt a response or make counter-arguments in favour of transparency on L.Z’s case. Parents may have wanted to raise safety concerns. Members of the media may have wanted to cover it as a matter of public interest. However, the only parties given an opportunity to oppose the publication ban were the bus line and the school board, and neither of them cared.

It’s unclear what L.Z. plans to argue or how much money is being sought. A hearing has not yet been scheduled, but the case is still ongoing — which means something, because the tribunal can dismiss complaints that are believed to have “no reasonable prospect” of success.

What’s outrageous is that this is the second high-profile instance of the Ontario human rights system reinforcing sexually inappropriate behaviour of adults who work with minors. Back in 2022, a male teacher in Oakville wore gigantic fake breasts — larger than watermelons — and tight clothing to class, dressing as a caricature of a woman. The Halton District School Board did nothing in response, claiming that Ontario’s human rights rules prevented any standards of dress from being enforced. The teacher was allowed to wear the sex prop to school for months.

If anything, human rights rules should protect children from being placed in the care of adults who exhibit inappropriate sexual behaviour. Instead, they’re being used to attack employers for firing said adults. It’s an unjustifiable waste of public resources.

The folks at York Catholic are, fortunately, not cowards. But they shouldn’t be punished for doing the right thing — especially in secret.

National Post

This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.