# 2012-158 Harassment, Initial Counselling (IC)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–03–28

Two subordinates complained they had been harassed by the grievor. Following situational assessments, the Responsible Officer determined that certain allegations met the criteria for harassment and directed that the two complaints be investigated. The investigations determined that one allegation in the first complaint and two in the second complaint, were founded. Consequently, the grievor was issued an initial counselling by the Responsible Officer, triggering his grievance.

The grievor objected to the findings in both investigations, alleging that the two complaints were made in bad faith to discredit him, that the investigator was biased, that the investigator failed to question the credibility of the two complainants, that the investigations were not conducted properly, and that the remedial measure taken against him was unfair. The grievor requested that either the two complaints be dismissed or new harassment investigations be carried out by members not posted to or employed at the Base.

The Initial Authority, the Base Commander, denied the grievance stating that the investigation were conducted objectively and in an unbiased manner, that the results of the investigations were supported by the evidence presented, and that the findings of harassment were reasonable.

The Board observed that although there was a history between the grievor and the two complainants, there was no evidence to conclude that the complaints were made in bad faith.

The Board found no evidence of bias, either real or apprehended on the part of the harassment investigator or Base authorities.

The Board concluded that the findings of the investigator were justified, transparent and intelligible in terms of the facts and the law. The Board found that the harassment investigations were carried out fairly and correctly and in accordance with the policy and that it was appropriate to issue a remedial measure given that the grievor had demonstrated a conduct deficiency. The Board recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–09–26

The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.