NC-188 - Harassment

The Appellant lodged a harassment complaint (Complaint) against the Zone Corporal (Alleged Harasser) accusing him of failing to use supervision documents appropriately, falsely accusing him of various severe perceived errors and having created a hostile and intimidating work environment. The Appellant also maintained that the Alleged Harasser failed to consider his need for accommodation. 

The Respondent dismissed the Complaint, finding that the Alleged Harasser was acting within the scope of his duties. The Appellant appealed the Decision arguing that the Respondent erred in law by misapplying the definition of harassment. The Appellant further argued that the Decision was clearly unreasonable on the basis that the Respondent made factual errors in his analysis of Alleged Behaviours 3, 4 and 5. Finally, the Appellant argues that the Respondent did not consider his need for accommodation.

The ERC found that the Respondent did not err in law and that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that the Decision is clearly unreasonable. More specifically, the ERC determined that the Respondent relied on the entirety of the evidence before him when he assessed the merits of the alleged behaviours. It was also found that the Respondent grappled with the controversial statements provided by the parties and explained why he preferred the Alleged Harasser’s version of events over that of the Appellant’s. The ERC also found that the Respondent’s reasons show that he had a firm grasp of the evidentiary record, that he  addressed the Appellant’s key concern, that he engaged in a coherent and rational analysis of the evidence and explained how the facts before him led him to conclude that the Alleged Harasser’s actions did not meet the definition of harassment. Finally, the ERC observed that the Respondent, in his role as decision maker in a harassment complaint, was not required to assess the Appellant’s need for accommodation; this issue goes beyond the scope of the appeal which concerns the reasonableness of the Decision. The ERC set aside the argument without considering it any further. 

The ERC recommends that the appeal be dismissed.