Upcoming Webinar: May 7, 2024 @ 12:00 P.M. (ET) | Cultural Initiatives in Policing: Part 2 – Calgary Police Service | Register Today!
A challenging question that employers may face is how to respond to historical complaints of harmful behaviour when such complaints arise and cause conflict in the workplace. It is not unusual for complaints to not be brought forward immediately. At times we see complaints of incidents dating back a few years, sometimes even over a decade.
Workplace restoration is a developing area which is now being considered by many employers. One reason for the growing interest is the ongoing effort by employers to improve the work experience for their employees and to create a safe and harmonious workplace for them.
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.
In organizational contexts, people are often familiar with investigation processes and workplace assessments as the “go to” measures to resolve complaints or conflicts in the workplace. These are important and necessary processes, but workplace restoration is in fact also an option, though not often considered.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, harassment and discrimination investigations have become quite prevalent in the workplace in recent years. Notwithstanding the legislative mandate, it is a positive indication when organizations are responding to complaints of harassment and discrimination within their workplace. However, in my experience as a workplace investigator, I often see quite clearly that, before an organization decides to pursue an investigation, there are multiple opportunities to address some of the issues by using less adversarial means.
Employers sometimes ask us for guidance on how to share the results of a workplace investigation with the parties. It’s not difficult to imagine why.
All parties to an investigation—so long as they are employees of the employer—are entitled to learn the results of the investigation, as noted in the Ministry of Labour’s Code of Practice.
Yet letting a Complainant know that his harassment complaint was not substantiated, or telling a Respondent that he engaged in bullying, is difficult information to deliver. Information like this can be physically and emotionally overwhelming for the parties to hear, and both may experience a variety of emotions in response.
We know that workplace investigations can be disorienting experiences for the employees involved in them. Even a well-planned investigation can leave employees confused, at best, or deeply hurt and resentful toward one another or their employer, at worst.
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2024
