NC-013 - Harassment

Soon after beginning a new posting in a small rural community, the Appellant underwent surgery for a shoulder injury she sustained while on-duty. Despite efforts at rehabilitation, she continued to suffer significant pain that required different accommodations. One accommodation involved her driving a police vehicle to and from an urban centre to see a pain management specialist, as there was no such specialist at her post. She found those drives to be excruciating. Her mental health declined as she dealt with the challenges of her physical pain and uncertain work status.

The Appellant was working towards a 40 hour per week schedule at which point she understood from her medical profile that she would be accommodated via a transfer to an urban centre. On the advice of an official, the Appellant contacted a Career Development and Resourcing Advisor (Alleged Harasser) regarding a transfer to an urban locale. She did not like the way the Alleged Harasser treated her during their initial phone call or at a later, face-to-face meeting. Ultimately, the Appellant was relocated to a city in another province by way of a separate RCMP process.

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint against the Alleged Harasser, which was denied by the Respondent following an investigation (Decision). The Appellant appealed the Decision 26 days after receiving it. She conceded that the appeal was late but asked that it be looked at, in any event. She asserted that she should have been better versed in policy, that she had asked questions about the Decision but was told it concluded a process, that her health made it hard for her to deal with the harassment complaint / appeals process and that she wanted the same courtesy the RCMP received when it gave her late updates during the harassment investigation.

The ERC agreed that the appeal was late. Pursuant to section 38 of the Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Grievance and Appeals) (CSOs (Grievances and Appeals), the Appellant was required to file her appeal within 14 days after the date upon which she was served with the Decision. She filed her appeal 26 days after she was served with the Decision. Furthermore, there were no exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of the time limit pursuant to subsection 43(d) of the CSOs (Grievances and Appeals). The record did not indicate that the Appellant had a continuing intention to lodge an appeal of the Decision during the 14 day appeal period. Her lack of familiarity with applicable authorities was not an adequate reason for failing to respect the statutory limitation period. She did not specify any health issue(s) that prohibited her from submitting a timely Statement of Appeal and provided no medical evidence of any such health issues or their impact on her ability to file an appeal during the required 14 days. Finally, the fact the RCMP might have breached a policy requirement during the harassment complaint process is irrelevant to the Appellant’s breach of the statutory time limit set forth in section 38 of the CSOs (Grievances and Appeals). To find otherwise would inject serious uncertainty into the appeal process, which is prejudicial not only to the RCMP but to all stakeholders in the process.

The ERC recommended to the Adjudicator that he or she dismiss the appeal on the basis that it was not presented within the 14 day time limit set forth in section 38 of the CSOs (Grievances and Appeals).

The Commissioner’s decision, as summarized by his office, is as follows:

The Appellant challenged the Respondent’s decision that her complaint of harassment was not established. The Appellant was served the Record of Decision on August 4, 2017, and presented her Statement of Appeal on August 30, 2017. The Office for the Coordination of Grievances and Appeals (OCGA) raised the issue of time limitation and sought submissions from the Parties.

The Appeal Adjudicator accepted the RCMP External Review Committee’s recommendation and dismissed the appeal on the basis that it was presented outside the statutory limitation period prescribed under section 38 of the Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Grievances and Appeals).