# 2022-248 Others, Mental Health, Summary Investigation

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-12-21

The grievor argued that the decision of the chain of command to not order a Board of Inquiry (BOI) or Summary Investigation (SI) into the workplace following a member's attempted suicide was counter to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) policy regarding the health and wellbeing of members. The grievor submitted that the omission of an independent investigation into contributing workplace factors towards mental health in his unit impacted him greatly. The grievor also argued that he suffered retribution for insisting that an investigation be conducted. The grievor further contended that the values and ethics of his unit's suicide awareness and prevention officer and Commanding Officer were not upheld, as they both failed to carry out their leadership duties and responsibilities. As redress, the grievor requested that an independent investigation be conducted into the leadership factors and workplace conditions at his unit; that the process for mental health crisis be reviewed by the leadership to ensure that it is understood that mental health is considered an injury and treated no different than a physical injury; and that his chain of command be held accountable for in their neglect towards the situation despite their knowledge.

The Initial Authority (IA), determined that the decision to not order a SI and/or convene a BOI was made in accordance with the applicable rules, regulations, and policies and concluded that the grievor was treated fairly. However, the IA noted that the conducting of an informal investigation into the matter may have been perceived as biased, and that an independent review would have offered a greater degree of procedural fairness with respect to the consideration of factors leading up to the incident. As such, the IA recommended that an SI be ordered.

The Committee noted that formal investigations are tools that are available to the chain of command to obtain further information about a particular matter. There is no right, substantively reinforced by policy, for a CAF member to insist that a formal investigation be undertaken by the chain of command. There may, however, be some instances a summary investigation must take place. Subsections 21.46 (2) and (3) of the Queen's Regulations and Order for the Canadian Forces outline these circumstances, which the grievor's unit colleague did not meet, likely due in part to the grievor's own, proactive actions. As a result, there was no legal obligation for the chain of command to order a formal investigation into the matter. The Committee supported the IA's recommendation that an SI be ordered, finding that it would ensure that any systemic issues are identified, and that safeguards are put into place to avoid a repetition of this type of incident in the future. The Committee noted that since the incident, the chain of command had undertaken many such reviews and had taken follow-up actions, showing that they were taking the situation seriously.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford the grievor's requested items for redress.