Upcoming Webinar: June 12, 2025 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | Mental Health Considerations for Workplace Investigators | Register Today!
La période est difficile pour toute personne œuvrant dans le domaine des droits de la personne, comme dans notre cas. Les programmes en équité, diversité et inclusion (EDI) font l’objet de vives attaques et sont en voie de démantèlement, du moins chez nos voisins du Sud, tant dans le secteur public que privé. Et il serait naïf de croire que le Canada est à l’abri de cette tendance.
My colleague Liliane Gingras recently wrote a blog titled, “The dismantling of DEI programs: A lawyer’s response.” In that blog, Liliane discussed her concerns regarding the current DEI backlash. Specifically, she expressed concern that some may believe that the absence of a DEI program in the workplace may mean that legal protection from discrimination disappears, which is not the case.
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.
L’une de nos responsabilités premières en tant qu’enquêteur(e)s en milieu de travail est d’être impartial. Les raisons de cette exigence sont assurément évidentes : si nous menions une enquête avec une idée préconçue de nos conclusions finales ou si nous favorisions une partie à l’enquête au détriment de l’autre, notre enquête ne serait pas équitable, et les participant(e)s n’auraient aucune raison de croire à l’intégrité de celle-ci.
It is a difficult time for anyone who works in the human rights space, like we do at Rubin Thomlinson LLP. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs are severely under attack and are being dismantled, at least south of the Canadian border, in the public and private sectors. I fear that Canada is not far behind.
One of our core responsibilities as workplace investigators is to be impartial. The reasons for this are probably obvious: if we were to conduct an investigation with a predetermined idea of the outcome, or if we were to favour one party over the other, our investigation would not be fair, and participants would have no reason to trust in the integrity of the investigation process.
There is no question that internal investigations are resource intensive. They need to be done fast, but thoroughly. They need to be done by people who have an appropriate skill level. Parties to an investigation need to be treated fairly and in a manner that is trauma informed.
In my last blog, I wrote about different types of employee misconduct, other than harassment and discrimination, that may warrant an investigation; for example, conflicts of interest, time theft, fraud, and the disclosure of confidential information.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2025
