C-178 - Conduct (Discipline) Appeals

The Appellant appealed the decision of the Conduct Authority (Respondent), who found that he contravened the RCMP Code of Conduct. The Appellant was discovered to have worked an excessive amount of overtime. As a result, he was issued a direction to seek approval from his superior before working further overtime. The Respondent found that the Appellant disregarded this direction, contrary to section 3.3 of the RCMP Code of Conduct. A second allegation under section 4.3 of the Code of Conduct was found not established. The Respondent imposed a forfeiture of two days’ pay and one day of leave. In the record of decision, the Respondent explained that although the written decision would be issued after the expiration of the one-year limitation period to impose conduct measures, her oral decision, confirming the measures, had been provided to the Appellant within the limitation period at the Conduct Meeting.

The Appellant submitted that his right to procedural fairness was breached due to the Respondent’s failure to disclose the evidence contained in the second Supplemental Investigation Report, and because of a reasonable apprehension of bias on the Respondent’s part. The Appellant also submitted that the Respondent’s findings on the allegation were clearly unreasonable. Concerning the conduct measures, the Appellant argued that these were out of time because the written decision was served to him outside of the one-year limitation period provided by subsection 42(2) of the RCMP Act. The Appellant also disputed the reasonableness of the McNeil disclosure obligation.

The ERC found that the Appellant’s right to procedural fairness was not breached and that neither the Respondent’s findings on the allegation nor the imposition of the McNeil disclosure requirement were clearly unreasonable. However, the ERC concluded that the Respondent erred in law by attempting to circumvent section 8 of the Commissioner’s Standing Order’s (Conduct) (CSO (Conduct)) and relying on the timing of her oral decision to meet the one-year requirement under the RCMP Act. The ERC confirmed that as per section 8 of the CSO (Conduct), a decision by a conduct authority, setting out any findings and conduct measure imposed, takes effect as soon as it is served. The ERC therefore found that the conduct measures were imposed after the expiry of the one-year time limit. 

The ERC recommends that the appeal be allowed and that the conduct measures be rescinded.