NC-300 - Harassment

The Appellant brought a harassment complaint (Complaint) against the Alleged Harasser, the Non-Commissioned Officer of a unit where he was successful in a job competition. The Complaint contained six alleged incidents. The Appellant alleged, among other things, that after disclosing his family status accommodation needs to the Alleged Harasser, the Alleged Harasser attempted to cancel his promotion, excluded him from unit communications, and discriminated against him based on the prohibited ground of family status as defined in the Canadian Human Rights Act.

An investigation was mandated into the Complaint. Two investigators conducted interviews including interviewing the Appellant and the Alleged Harasser. A Final Investigation Report (FIR) was provided to the Respondent. After considering the FIR, the Respondent found that the Complaint did not meet the definition of harassment. The Appellant appealed the Respondent’s Decision. 

The ERC found that the Respondent’s decision was procedurally unfair and clearly unreasonable.

The ERC found that the decision was procedurally unfair because the investigation was incomplete. The investigators did not obtain potentially obviously crucial information from two witnesses. Those omissions deprived the Respondent of potentially pivotal evidence which may have materially affected the decision.

The ERC also found that the decision was clearly unreasonable, as it did not meaningfully address central and key concerns, and lacked rational and tenable lines of analysis.

The ERC recommends that the appeal be allowed and remitted to a new decision-maker.