Upcoming Webinar: February 6, 2025 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | Reviewing University Sexual Violence Policies | Register Today!
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.
For many years prior to joining Rubin Thomlinson LLP, my work involved the investigation of matters that did not relate to harassment or discrimination. I held in-house roles in the private and public sectors that involved the oversight of whistleblower programs.
Québec case law often goes unnoticed in the rest of Canada and remains inaccessible to most workplace investigators across the country, primarily due to linguistic reasons. This situation is quite unfortunate since Québec courts, tribunals, and adjudicators render interesting and innovative decisions every year in various areas of interest, including human rights and labour law.
La jurisprudence québécoise passe souvent inaperçue dans les autres provinces canadiennes et demeure inaccessible pour la grande majorité des enquêteurs et enquêteuses en milieu de travail du pays, et ce, pour des raisons principalement linguistiques. Cette situation est malheureuse, puisque chaque année, les tribunaux québécois rendent des décisions intéressantes et innovatrices dans plusieurs domaines d’intérêt, dont en droits de la personne et en droit du travail.
When organizations retain a workplace assessor to help reveal employee experiences of workplace harassment and sexual harassment, they usually ask the assessor to make recommendations as to what the organization should do next.
One question that often arises when addressing incidents of discrimination or harassment under human rights legislation is who is liable. This issue arose in a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Incognito v Skyservice Business Aviation Inc., …
This is the second of a series of three posts in which I summarize what independent workplace assessments have revealed about the Canadian Armed Forces’ struggle to address sexual misconduct in the profession of arms.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2025
