Upcoming Webinar: January 23, 2025 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | The Top 10 Workplace Investigation Cases of 2024 | Register Today!
I recently presented a webinar with my colleagues, Janice Rubin and Elizabeth Bingham, called, “How to be a Good Second Reader.” The webinar was aimed at those who, like me, review investigation reports.
As a workplace investigator, maintaining neutrality and avoiding bias is always top of mind. I found a recent Federal Court case, Whitelaw v. Canada (Attorney General), to be helpful, because it provides a great summary of the case law in this area, and insight into what the Court evaluates when dealing with allegations of procedural unfairness in investigations.
I recently had the privilege of being a speaker at an webinar event hosted by the Society of Ontario Adjudicators and Regulators (SOAR), to deliver training on fairness issues in investigations.
Most organizations allow employees to use some degree of discretion (i.e., use their own judgement) when making hiring, promotional, and pay decisions. I have noticed a trend in several of my recent investigations, which is that the exercise of managerial discretion became a source of friction and …
Workplace investigations have been around for quite some time as a way for diligent employers to address potential issues hindering the workplace. If, as a result of its long-standing use, they no longer appear cryptic in the eyes of some employees and employers, they still carry a perfume of mystery and elicit questions for many others. In my practice, most of the questions I hear from parties and witnesses in an investigation are procedure-based, pertaining to confidentiality or the length of the process.
In the world of workplace investigations, we often hear of adopting a trauma-informed approach in sexual harassment cases. We especially heard this during the #MeToo movement, and, indeed, it was necessary.
Conducting an investigation that is thorough, fair, confidential, and timely is, to speak plainly, complicated work. Investigators must make many difficult judgement calls during the process, including which witnesses to interview, which records, texts, and emails to review, and how to weigh the various types of evidence when making findings of fact.
I have been an adjudicator for four different administrative tribunals over the course of more than 20 years. This experience has served me well since I have found that many adjudicative skills are transferable to investigations.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2024
