At Rubin Thomlinson we deliver a lot of training on conducting workplace investigations and often the discussion turns to the costs of conducting an investigation, whether it be the monetary costs of an external investigation or the time costs of an internal investigation. These costs are typically balanced with the benefits of conducting an effective investigation, such as allowing employees to be heard, demonstrating a commitment to a respective workplace culture by “walking the talk” of policies, clarifying what actually occurred, and implementing targeted outcomes.
The law on harassment investigations tells us that an employer must conduct an investigation that is “reasonable” and “appropriate in the circumstances.” The challenge is to know what the exact content of a reasonable and appropriate investigation is, particularly when the workplace issue to investigate appears to be like a puzzle with missing pieces whose final picture is constantly shifting.
When it comes to making buying decisions, we all want the same thing: quality merchandise that is readily available, for a fair price. But this isn’t all – more and more consumers are factoring corporate image and business ethics into their buying decisions. We want to know how a business treats its workers, what impact its production methods have on the environment, and what corporate values it champions.
Deen Morgan believed that he was targeted at work because of his skin colour. His employer did not agree but it dismissed Mr. Morgan’s concerns and instead found a reason to terminate his employment. When he took his complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “HRTO”), they ruled in a decision released last