NC-225 - Harassment

The Appellant lodged a harassment complaint (Complaint) against the Alleged Harasser, accusing him of several alleged behaviours. For example, it was alleged that the Alleged Harasser used the Appellant’s medical issues and disability against him to initiate conduct proceedings. In this regard, the Appellant argued that the Alleged Harasser lied and misrepresented the facts in his statement during the Code of Conduct investigation, and that he sought punitive measures rather than showing any concern or compassion for the Appellant’s situation.

The Respondent dismissed the Complaint, finding that the Alleged Harasser’s actions did not meet the definition of harassment as prescribed in the RCMP Harassment Policy (AM XII.8). The Appellant appealed the decision indicating that it was procedurally unfair because he did not obtain full disclosure of the material that was before the Respondent. He further argued that the decision was clearly unreasonable on the basis that the Respondent failed to provide sufficient reasons in support of his finding that the Alleged Harasser’s actions did not amount to harassment. Finally, the Appellant challenged the Respondent’s decision not to mandate an investigation. 

While the ERC found that the decision was not reached in a procedurally unfair manner, it was determined that it was clearly unreasonable because it did not contain a rational or tenable line of analysis supporting the conclusion that the allegations were not established. The ERC further found that the decision to forego mandating an investigation was clearly unreasonable.

The ERC recommended that the appeal be allowed.

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 allowed.