NC-117 - Harassment

The Appellant filed a number of harassment complaints against RCMP members and a non-RCMP member. This particular complaint related to how a senior RCMP manager (Alleged Harasser) conducted herself in respect to the early resolution process. The Appellant made four allegations against the Alleged Harasser, claiming among other things, that she spread malicious rumours about his mental health/emotional status to others.

The Office for the Coordination of Harassment Complaints (OCHC) recommended that no investigation take place and found that the complaints were frivolous and vexatious. The OCHC provided no reasoning in support of their findings and recommendation.

The Respondent found that the Alleged Harasser was simply acting in her capacity as a manager; found that it was unnecessary to conduct an investigation into his allegations; found that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious, and said with certainty that harassment did not occur.

The Appellant appealed, claiming that the Respondent’s Decision was clearly unreasonable and that the process was procedurally unfair, as he was not given the opportunity to provide, among other things, supplemental information i.e., evidence in support of his allegations. The Appellant requested a new decision-maker and that his allegations be investigated.

The Alleged Harasser retired from the RCMP.

The ERC addressed the Decision in terms of its reasonableness. The ERC found that the Decision was clearly unreasonable. The Appellant made serious allegations against a former senior RCMP member and his complaint should have been investigated. The Respondent painted a very broad brush finding that the Alleged Harasser was simply performing her managerial responsibilities without assessing whether or not her actions constituted harassment.

The Appellant was highly critical of the OCHC in respect to how that Office conducted itself in respect to their dealings with the Appellant and in respect to their findings that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious. While not a Respondent, the ERC found that the OCHC, in the absence of an investigation, was wrong in law and that its comments were inappropriate.

The ERC acknowledged that investigations into harassment complaints do not have to occur in all circumstances, but in this, case, an investigation was required.

Due to the fact that the Alleged Harasser has retired, as well as the fact that the latest allegations date back to 2017, the ERC recommended that an investigation at this point would be difficult. The ERC recommended that the Appellant be provided with a written apology, acknowledging that the RCMP should have done better. 

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

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint against the Alleged Harasser. The Respondent issued a Record of Decision where he determined that harassment was not established, concluding that the Appellant’s complaint was unfounded and that an investigation into his complaint was not necessary.

The Appellant filed a Statement of Appeal, claiming that the decision is clearly unreasonable and was reached in a manner that contravened the applicable principles of procedural fairness. The appeal was referred to the ERC and in a Report containing Findings and Recommendations, the ERC recommended that the appeal be allowed on the grounds that the decision is clearly unreasonable, since the Respondent lacked information for his conclusions. The ERC noted that the Alleged Harasser has since retired and that, with the passage of time, a meaningful investigation can no longer be performed. The ERC recommended that the Respondent’s decision be set aside and that an apology be provided to the Appellant.

Having considered the facts of the matter, the applicable statutory provisions, and the relevant jurisprudence, the Adjudicator concurred with the findings of the ERC and allowed the appeal. The Adjudicator agreed with the ERC that a viable investigation is no longer a possibility and offered and apology to the Appellant on behalf of the RCMP.