Grievance Case Summary - G-571

The Grievor made a harassment complaint. The Respondent reviewed the matter and made a decision that resulted in the Force taking no further action. After the filing of the grievance, the Respondent advised the Grievor that there had been an error made in the handling of his harassment complaint. The Human Resources Officer (HRO) was required to advise the Responsible Officer (RO) on the complaint and to direct the complaint to him or her for a final decision. In the Grievor’s case, the HRO had failed to direct the complaint to the RO for final decision. The Respondent advised the Grievor that, to correct the error, he had directed the complaint to the RO for decision.

There was a new decision by the RO and the Grievor filed a grievance against that decision. However, the Grievor did not withdraw his previous grievance. The file was sent to the Level I Adjudicator on the issue on standing. The Level I Adjudicator ruled that the grievance did not have standing as it was filed prematurely as no final decision had been made by a person in authority.

The ERC found that the Grievor met the criteria for standing. The grievance was not premature because the Respondent’s decision ended the review of the Grievor’s harassment complaint. The question of whether or not the Respondent was authorized to make the final decision regarding the Grievor’s harassment complaint is a question of merits and not standing.

The ERC recommended to the Commissioner of the RCMP that he find that the Grievor had standing to bring the grievance. The ERC also recommended to the Commissioner that, as the Grievor has passed away and no practical and effective remedy can be provided to the Grievor, he find that the present grievance is moot.

The Commissioner has rendered his decision in this matter, as summarized by his office:

The Grievor presented a grievance against the decision by the Respondent, the Human Resources Officer, concerning the outcome of his harassment complaint. The Commanding Officer, as the Responsible Officer, had the authority to render a decision and not the Respondent. During the course of Early Resolution the mistake was acknowledged and the matter was put to the Commanding Officer for a decision. The Grievor presented a new grievance against the decision of the Commanding Officer and refused to withdraw the original grievance. The Respondent claimed that the Grievor did not have standing and the Level I Adjudicator agreed. Like the ERC, the Commissioner found that the Grievor had standing but deemed the grievance to be moot given that the Grievor had since died.