NC-006 - Harassment

The Appellant worked with a joint forces operation led by the RCMP, housed in an RCMP office and governed by a written agreement between the RCMP and participating partner agencies. The Appellant’s line officer was a police officer employed by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) (Alleged Harasser).

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint (Complaint) with the RCMP stating that the Alleged Harasser repeatedly undermined his career. The Respondent and other RCMP harassment officials evaluated the Complaint and concluded that the RCMP’s harassment policy did not permit the RCMP to investigate or impose measures against alleged harassers employed by other agencies. An RCMP harassment advisor advised the Appellant that the RCMP did not have authority to investigate the Complaint. She suggested that the Appellant raise the Complaint with the OPP and provided the coordinates of an OPP superintendent, Supt. S, to the Appellant as a contact person. Supt. S advised the Appellant that the Alleged Harasser had recently retired, precluding the OPP from compelling the Alleged Harasser to cooperate in any OPP harassment investigation. Several months later, the Appellant received an email from an RCMP Employee Management Relations Advisor stating that, as the Alleged Harasser had retired, there were no remaining processes within the RCMP to address the Grievor’s Complaint.

The Grievor filed an appeal, asserting that the Respondent failed to properly deal with the Complaint.

The ERC stated that five types of non-conduct appeals are referable to the ERC, pursuant to section 17(a) to (e) of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Regulations, 2014 (Regulations). The present non-conduct appeal did not fall within the ambit of subsections 17(b) to (e), as those subsections all deal with subjects that were not at issue.

The other type of referable non-conduct appeal is identified in subsection 17(a) of the Regulations. It involves an appeal of a decision that is described in subsection 6(1) or paragraph 6(2)(b) of the Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Investigation and Resolution of Harassment Complaints), which read as follows:

The ERC concluded that this case did not involve an appeal of a decision described in these provisions. The Appellant is not challenging a decision made pursuant to subsection 6(1). Further, the Appellant is not appealing a decision made pursuant to paragraph 6(2)(b). It is clear from the record that no decision regarding a contravention of the Code of Conduct was made. In fact, the Appellant’s complaint was never investigated by the Force. Therefore, the appeal is not referable to the ERC.

This appeal is not referable to the ERC. As a result, the ERC does not have the legal authority to further review the appeal or to make any findings or recommendations.

The ERC returned the file to the RCMP to be addressed by the responsible office(s) within the Force.