G-790 – Harassment

The Grievor contests the Respondent’s decision that the Alleged Harasser did not engage in harassment. The grievance was denied on its merits at Level I.  The Grievor submitted his case at Level II and it was referred to the RCMP External Review Committee (ERC) for an independent review. In his Harassment Complaint, the Grievor alleged that a Performance Log issued by the Alleged Harasser was retaliatory because the Grievor had filed a prior Harassment Complaint against the Alleged Harasser. No investigation was mandated into the Grievor’s allegation of reprisal. The Grievor argues that his Harassment Complaint should have been fully investigated, and that the delay in processing his grievance was an abuse of process.

The ERC found that the Respondent’s decision to not mandate an investigation was not in accordance with policy, which required that an investigation should have been mandated as a result of the Grievor’s allegation that the Alleged Harasser’s actions were a reprisal against him. The ERC further found that because of the Respondent’s failure to mandate an investigation, it was not possible to determine whether the Alleged Harasser had exercised his managerial responsibilities in a respectful manner, as required by the Harassment Policy. With respect to the Grievor’s abuse of process argument, the ERC found that the Grievor did not establish that the delay caused “significant prejudice” as required by the test for abuse of process.

The ERC recommends that the grievance be allowed. With respect to remedy, noting that the Grievor indicates that he still has the relevant documentary evidence to support his Harassment Complaint, and noting the seriousness of an allegation of reprisal and the impact the Grievor said the events had on him, the ERC recommends that despite the significant passage of time, the matter should be remitted for investigation before a new decision-maker.