NC-182 - Harassment

The Appellant appeals the Respondent’s Decision that the Alleged Harasser did not engage in harassment. The Appellant argues that there was a breach of procedural fairness in relation to the investigation, argues that the Respondent erred in law, and argues that the Respondent’s Decision is clearly unreasonable, unsupported by the evidence, and inconsistent with the evidence provided to the investigators.

The ERC found that the Appellant was precluded from raising a breach of procedural fairness on appeal in relation to whether investigators had failed to provide the Respondent with all of the relevant documentary evidence, and whether they failed to sufficiently summarize the oral and documentary evidence, because he did not raise his argument at the earliest opportunity. The ERC further found that the Appellant did not rebut the presumption that the Respondent had considered all the evidence, and further found that the Respondent had provided sufficient reasons. Her Decision was therefore not clearly unreasonable. The ERC further found that the Respondent did not err in law because she properly applied the test for harassment. Lastly, the ERC commented that the Appellant surreptitiously recording a conversation with the Alleged Harasser, who was his supervisor, undermined the relationship between them, had the appearance that he was goading the Alleged Harasser into becoming angry in order to entrap him, and is to be discouraged.

The ERC recommended that the appeal be denied.

The Adjudicator agreed with the ERC Findings and Recommendations and as such, adopted the ERC Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as their reasons for concluding for that this appeal be dismissed.