# 2020-161 Harassment

Case summary

F&R Date: 2021-10-28

The grievor filed a harassment complaint alleging that her supervisor had verbally and physically harassed her in a sexual manner. A Military Police (MP) investigation did not result in charges against the supervisor. Without further investigation, the responsible officer (RO) then closed the complaint file citing the MP investigation, past unsubstantiated harassment claims and the lack of corroborating witnesses as reasons for doing so. 

There was no Initial Authority decision in relation to this grievance. 

The Committee found that the RO failed to fulfill his obligations in assessing the harassment complaint. Once the MP investigation had concluded without charges, the RO had a duty to continue investigating the complaint. The Committee noted that the RO was not justified in relying on past, unsubstantiated complaints as a reason to question the validity of this complaint since there was no evidence that the grievor had submitted unsubstantiated complaints in the past. Furthermore, the Committee observed that the RO could not rely on a lack of corroborating witnesses because the grievor had specifically indicated that the harassment occurred when she was alone with her supervisor. 

The Committee recommended that the investigation process of the harassment complaint be started all over again.

FA decision summary

The Final Authority (FA), Director Canadian Forces Grievance Authority, agreed with the Committee's finding that the grievor had been aggrieved, and with its recommendation that the harassment complaint be properly investigated. The FA noted that the allegations appear to have met the definition of sexual misconduct and that consultation with the Office of the Judge Advocate General was therefore required. However, there was no evidence to suggest that any such consultation occurred. Furthermore, the RO was not entitled to rely solely on the results of the MP investigation into the grievor's allegations. Rather, once that investigation was completed, the RO had a duty to resume the harassment resolution process. It was not appropriate to end the process via a letter of administrative closure. The FA directed the unit Commanding Officer to ensure that the grievor's harassment complaint is properly investigated, that the grievor receives all documentation relevant to the investigation, that the grievor is provided with verification that proper standard operating procedures to address sexual misconduct harassment complaints are in place at the unit, and that the letter of administrative closure be rescinded.