Upcoming Webinar: September 18, 2025 @ 12:30 P.M. (ET) | Physical Health for Workplace Investigators | Register Today!
Reflections and news direct from Rubin Thomlinson.
Subscribe to receive updates of interest to you.
Filtered By:
In workplace restoration processes, when engaging with the respective parties, it often becomes apparent to me that the root of their conflict may be due to differences in their respective personalities. That is because those differences impact how they communicate, how they approach their work, their expectations of others, their expectations of themselves and so much more.
I remember it like it happened yesterday. My colleague and I were packing our briefcases at the end of a long day. Another colleague approached and offered to carry my colleague’s briefcase. She declined his offer, and he offered again. She refused again, and he said, “But you’re such a little thing.” I remember this incident so clearly, even though it happened several years ago. It was disorienting and awkward.
Le gouvernement de l’Ontario a récemment annoncé le dépôt du projet de loi 190 (également connu sous le nom de Loi de 2024 visant à œuvrer pour les travailleurs, cinq). Le projet de loi propose des modifications à divers textes législatifs liés à l’emploi. L’un de ces changements est l’élargissement des définitions du harcèlement au travail et du harcèlement sexuel au travail en vertu de la Loi sur la Santé et la Sécurité au Travail (« LSST ») pour y inclure certaines activités virtuelles.
This is the third and final post in a series of blog posts that I wrote on data and investigations.
To recap, workplace investigations are also an invaluable source of data that organizations can use in a variety of ways – outside of the investigation process – to help their workplaces get into the zone – the optimal workplace that is characterized by respect, civility, tolerance, inclusivity, and no, or few, employment-related legal problems.
In most of our workplace investigations, the organization that retains us asks us to measure our findings of fact against one or more of their policies. This means that, once we have made findings of fact, we must decide whether the respondent’s conduct has breached a policy or policies that the organization has asked us to apply.
The Ontario government recently announced its introduction of Bill 190 (also known as the Working for Workers Five Act, 2024). The bill proposes changes to various pieces of employment-related legislation. One of these changes is the expansion of the definitions of workplace harassment and workplace sexual harassment under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”) to include certain virtual activities.
Where does the time go? Federally-regulated organizations surely recall the passing of Bill C-65 which amended the harassment and violence provisions of the Canada Labour Code (“CLC”). They also no doubt recall the accompanying Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations (“Regulations”) that came into effect in January of 2021, and set out more specific requirements for those employers that fall within federal jurisdiction.
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
