Upcoming Webinar: November 27, 2025 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | “Deep Fakes” and Other New Technological Challenges in Workplace Investigations | Register Today!
In a previous blog, I wrote about the unique challenges of conducting “C-suite investigations” — in other words, investigations into a member or members of an organization’s senior leadership. It is not unusual that these types of investigations are prompted by a complaint made directly (and sometimes anonymously) to an organization’s Board of Directors.
Si vous travaillez dans le domaine des relations de travail ou du droit du travail pour un employeur de compétence fédérale, vous savez déjà que, dans certains cas, vous avez l’obligation d’enclencher un processus formel en matière de harcèlement, ce qui implique parfois de mener une enquête
Our firm sometimes acts as a third-party service provider to do the intake of complaints or whistleblower reports on behalf of clients. Clients retain our intake services for a variety of reasons – for example, if there are insufficient resources internally to handle the volume of complaints, or as a good governance measure to encourage those in the organization to come forward.
You receive an anonymous complaint through your whistleblowing portal that your CFO is having an affair with a subordinate. Your board receives a complaint that your CEO is creating a toxic work environment. Some of the most challenging complaints for organizations to address are complaints against C-level employees and other members of senior leadership.
Being trauma-informed is something that we are hearing quite a lot about in the space of workplace investigations, and rightly so. There is a lot of good conversation happening as employers, investigators, lawyers, human resource personnel, etc., are all starting to understand and appreciate the value and importance of conducting trauma-informed workplace investigations.
As far as non-human rights matters go, conflicts of interest are a frequent cause of employee complaints. Some employees believe that it is their duty to report what they perceive to be a conflict-of-interest situation.
When it comes to anonymity in workplace investigations, there are various facets. One of our partners, Liliane Gingras, recently wrote a blog about the risks of promising complainants a guarantee of anonymity throughout the investigative process. However, I would like to talk about situations where complaints are made by individuals who are completely unknown to the employer.
We often hear horror stories about workplace complaints being handled poorly — instances where employers don’t act, investigators miss the mark, and so on and so forth. I’ll now be the bearer of good news and share what the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) recently found to be reasonable handling of a complaint in Salanguit v. Parq Vancouver and another.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2025
