The Truth about Workplace Investigations: Legal Information and Tips for Success
The truth about workplace investigations is that the cost of inadequately or completely failing to investigate workplace issues has risen dramatically in recent years. This failure to comply has serious consequences as evidenced by the following three workplace complaints that should be investigated.
1. Human Rights Complaints
Failure to investigate a human rights violation could cost an employer $7,500 (or more) in damages regardless of whether there was a violation. Although the Ontario Human Rights Code (the Code) does not require that an employer investigate an alleged violation of the Code, adjudicators appointed under the Code have imposed this duty on employers. To avoid this kind of damage award, investigators should be trained in human rights and in workplace investigation.
2. Wrongful Dismissal Actions
If an employer believes it has just cause to terminate an employee but its internal investigation is flawed, the courts can and have ordered the employer to pay punitive damages to the terminated employee. This can be very costly. For this reason, we recommend an employer complete a full investigation before the termination, although it is not require. And, in some instances of misconduct an employer may need to hire a third party such as a forensic accountant or an IT specialist to conduct the investigation.
3. Workplace Harassment and Violence Complaints
A violation of the Ontario Occupational Health & Safety Act (OHSA) can result in a fine of up to $ 500 000. Under the OHSA an employer is required to investigate allegations of workplace harassment and workplace violence. Investigators assigned to these kinds of complaints should receive occupational health & safety training and workplace investigation training.
Complex legal issues can arise out of workplace investigations. Here are two such issues:
1. Who should perform workplace investigations; an in-house investigator, lawyer, or professional workplace investigator?
Some issues to be investigated are straightforward and an employee can conduct the investigation. But, sometimes the issue(s) to be investigated is very complex, sensitive or highly politicized and it is necessary to hire an outside workplace investigator.
According to workplace investigator Monica Jeffrey ([email protected]), one reason to hire an impartial investigator is to eliminate actual or perceived internal bias. This is particularly true when the allegations involve a supervisor, manager, partner and/or a business owner. An investigation conducted by a third party, neutral investigator will often go a long way in satisfying an employee’s expectation that his/her complaint is being considered in a fair and equitable manner.
2. Can an investigator’s notes be used against the employer in subsequent legal proceedings?
This is a very tricky legal issue and the answer is sometimes “yes”. In a recent arbitration case, the employer hired an investigator to conduct an investigation and the arbitrator found that the investigator’s report was not protected by solicitor-client privilege even though the investigator was a lawyer. If legal proceedings are expected and an outside investigator is to be hired, it is important that all communication flows through the employer’s lawyer to ensure solicitor/client privilege.
Today, conducting adequate workplace investigations is crucial in a number of situations. Increasingly the investigation process is being subject to judicial scrutiny and courts are starting to order employers to pay damages for failing to investigate certain workplace complaints, or for conducting faulty investigations.
If you have any questions about workplace investigations or how to conduct a workplace investigation, please contact the MacLeod Law Firm at 1 (888) 640-1728 or at [email protected]. To subscribe to our blog for employers, click here
The material and information in this blog and this website are for general information only. They should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information referred to in this blog or its links. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog. Readers should obtain appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or the MacLeod Law Firm.
Recent Posts
Doug’s Top 5 Employment Law Stories of 2022
Here are my top 5 employment law stories for 2022: 1. COVID 19 - Temporary Layoffs This issue remains my number one story because this issue impacts so many court cases. Some judges have concluded that a temporary layoff set out in the Infectious Disease Emergency...
Reducing Litigation Risk
In a recent case, Pohl v. Hudson’s Bay Company, 2022 ONSC 5230 (CanLII),an employer was ordered to pay a long service employee the equivalent of about 3 years pay and contribute about $ 35 000 to his legal fees. Although this was a without cause termination case, it...
Employment Law Update: Electronic Monitoring Policy
A new amendment to the Employment Standards Act requires employers with 25 or more employees on January 1st of a given year to put in place a written policy regarding any electronic monitoring processes they use to monitor employees. The deadline for 2022 is October...