Upcoming Webinar: May 7, 2024 @ 12:00 P.M. (ET) | Cultural Initiatives in Policing: Part 2 – Calgary Police Service | Register Today!
We know that workplace investigations can be disorienting experiences for the employees involved in them. Even a well-planned investigation can leave employees confused, at best, or deeply hurt and resentful toward one another or their employer, at worst.
Most of us approach our work with the intention of doing our best. We strive to ensure that the quality of our work meets the standards that we have set for ourselves as well as those established by our employer and the clients or customers we serve. Whether or not this objective is realized depends on a combination of factors that relate to our individual strengths and the particular conditions of our work environment.
One of my most embarrassing moments occurred in high school when I had dinner with a friend, whose grandmother was visiting from Iran. She had made us a wonderful meal, and because she didn’t speak any English I tried to convey my gratitude with two enthusiastic thumbs up. She gave me a shocked look and ran out of the room, while my friend and her parents dissolved into horrified giggles. Apparently, the “thumbs up” gesture does not mean the same thing throughout the world.
The first question employers need to ask themselves when a complaint is raised, is whether they need to investigate. The case of Gu v. Habitat for Humanity Greater Toronto Area Inc., 2018 ONSC 2725 (CanLII) helps to answer that question. It illustrates that a general allegation of discrimination without any details after an attempt has been made to obtain those details, does not trigger an employer’s duty to investigate.
Policies and procedures serve many roles in the workplace. In simplest terms, a policy sets out the legislation-mandated as well as the expected standards of behaviour for employees and stakeholders. Procedures provide a how-to guide to direct individuals where to go when they question the behavior they see or experience.
Guidance on appropriate investigations into inappropriate comments
As investigators, we see that harassment often comes in the form of derogatory comments about people’s racial and ethnic background, as well as their sex, gender identity and gender expression. What we do not see as investigators, but can reasonably assume, is that these comments often go uninvestigated. Why?
As an investigator, one of the questions I get asked most often is, “How do you know who is telling the truth?” It is a great question, and one that I think all investigators grapple with. Indeed, one of the hardest parts of report-writing is drafting the credibility section. My colleague Megan Forward previously provided a “credibility assessment lexicon” that can come in handy when writing about a party’s credibility. A recent arbitration decision out of Alberta provides some valuable pointers on how to properly assess the credibility of a party’s evidence.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2024
