NC-230 - Harassment

The Appellant was an officer with ten years of experience at the time of this harassment complaint (Complaint). The Alleged Harasser was the operations NCO at the Detachment at issue. The Appellant brought a Complaint against the Alleged Harasser. The Complaint contained six Allegations. The Complaint was one of five associated harassment complaints, initially submitted as a single complaint to the Office for the Coordination of Harassment Complaints.

Two investigators were assigned to examine the Allegations and provide a Final Investigation Report (FIR). The Respondent, after considering the FIR, which included interviews with twelve individuals, including the Appellant and the Alleged Harasser, found that the Complaint did not meet the definition of harassment.

The Appellant appealed the Respondent’s Decision. The Appellant raises a broad range of grounds as to why he believes the Respondent’s Decision was procedurally unfair, based on an error of law, and clearly unreasonable. 

The ERC found that the appeal should be allowed because the Decision was based on errors of law, and was clearly unreasonable.

The ERC found that the Respondent erred in his application of the harassment test. The Respondent misdirected the onus of proof concerning the Complaint onto the Appellant in his assessment of the evidence. In addition, the Respondent failed to consider the Allegations collectively, as a series of incidents, while also misapplying the reasonable person test.

Further, the Respondent’s findings pertaining to Allegations 1 and 6 lacked rational and tenable lines of analysis, and failed to meaningfully account for the central issue of credibility, resulting in a clearly unreasonable Decision. The ERC also addressed other key issues raised by the Appellant, which generally pertained to the processing of this Appeal.

The ERC recommends that the appeal be allowed, and the matter be remitted to a new decision-maker, with directions for rendering a new decision.