# 2011-095 Harassment, Claims Against the Crown, Harassment, Situational Assessment

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2011–09–28

The grievor objected to the outcome of a situational assessment (SA) concerning a complaint of harassment he had submitted. The grievor stated that the closure of his complaint was premature and did not adequately address his concerns. The grievor alleged that the measures he was subjected to, combined with the manner his harassment complaint was handled, caused him immeasurable humiliation and suffering. As redress, he requested financial compensation in the amount of $200,000.

The grievor refused a request for extension to the initial authority (IA) and requested that his file be forwarded to the final authority for adjudication. Consequently, the file was referred to the Board without an IA decision.

The Board reviewed Defence Administrative Order and Directive 5012-0 - Harassment Prevention and Resolution, as well as the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines. The Board's position is that the test to determine if a complaint is admissible is to consider whether, as stated, the allegations meet the conditions for harassment; based on that determination, the responsible officer will either direct that an investigation be conducted or inform the complainant that the allegations do not meet the definition of harassment.

In the case at hand, the Board was of the opinion that if the grievor's allegations, as written, were proven to be true, they would amount to harassment. However, based on the additional information obtained during its review of the grievance, the Board found that the author of the measures the grievor objected to was legitimately exercising his supervisory function and his decision was reasonable in the circumstances. Consequently, the Board concluded that a harassment investigation is neither necessary nor appropriate.

In the matter of the remedy sought by the grievor, the Board noted that, in any event, the Chief of the Defence Staff is not empowered to pay financial compensation for "anguish and suffering". Given its previous finding, the Board did not recommend that this request be further examined.

The Board recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2011–12–13

Case withdrawn at Final Authority level.