D-140 - Adjudication Board Decision

The Appellant hosted a dinner at his home in a community. One of the guests at the dinner was an RCMP Constable for whom the Appellant was the direct supervisor. The Constable attended in full uniform and he was equipped to go on duty after the dinner. The Appellant offered the Constable an alcoholic beverage. After the Constable refused, the Appellant served him a drink, which turned out to contain alcohol. According to the Constable, the Appellant opined that it was acceptable for members to have an alcoholic drink every four hours while on duty. These events led to an investigation of alleged disgraceful conduct. A senior RCMP member recalled that when he notified the Appellant of the investigation, the Appellant swore at him and expressed a dislike for him and for other commanding officers.

An Adjudication Board found that the Appellant’s actions amounted to disgraceful conduct. The Board imposed a demotion and a reprimand. The Appellant appealed, claiming that the Board had committed multiple errors in its findings and that it had breached his procedural rights. Furthermore, the Appellant argued that the sanction of demotion was unreasonable.

The ERC found that that the Board made no error in its findings on merits, and that the Appellant’s procedural rights had been respected throughout the process. However, the ERC found the sanction of demotion to be clearly disproportionate to the nature of the Appellant’s actions. The ERC emphasized that past appeals where a sanction of demotion was deemed to be appropriate involved misconduct which was markedly more egregious than the Appellant’s misconduct.

The ERC recommended that the Commissioner allow the appeal and vary the sanction of demotion to a forfeiture of 10 days’ pay. 

The Commissioner dismissed the appeal.