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 recommends that an investigation at this point would be difficult. The ERC recommends that the Appellant be provided with a written apology, acknowledging that the RCMP should have done better.