NC-141 - Harassment

As silent protest, some members were wearing their duty pants without the yellow stripe. They were allegedly told that they would not be punished for doing so by management. However, the Appellant was told that the Officer in Charge of the detachment, the Alleged Harasser, encouraged the wearing of the yellow stripe. The Appellant sought direction as to whether putting back the yellow stripe on his uniform pants was encouraged or directed by the Alleged Harasser. At the same time, the Appellant had made an application to join a special team for work. He was informed by those in higher rank that his application was not accepted by the Alleged Harasser, because he was looked upon as having “attitude”, all because of the questioning of the wearing of the yellow stripe.

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint against the Alleged Harasser for forcing him to wear the yellow stripe, contrary to what management had previously stated. The Appellant further alleged that the Alleged Harasser abused his authority by refusing to transfer him to the special team, even though his candidacy was supported.

The Respondent did not mandate a harassment investigation, in spite of the fact that the Appellant had listed a number of witnesses and said with “certainty” that no harassment took place.

The Appellant appealed claiming that the Decision was reached in a procedurally unfair manner and was clearly unreasonable.

The ERC found that the Decision was both procedurally unfair and clearly unreasonable. While not every case needs to be investigated, in this matter the Respondent did not have the “full story” of what happened. The seriousness of the allegations, that a member of officer rank abused his authority against a subordinate, required careful attention on the part of the Respondent. The Respondent repeatedly indicated that there was no evidence in support of the Appellant’s allegations but in fact there was: the Appellant’s evidence.  

The ERC recommended the appeal be allowed; the Decision set aside; and a new decision-maker be appointed with directions to undertake an investigation. 

The Adjudicator agreed with the ERC Findings and Recommendations and as such, adopted the ERC Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as their reasons for concluding for that this appeal be allowed.