There is a persistent assumption in employment law that, once a workplace complaint has been investigated, the matter is over.
An employee complains. The employer hires an outside investigator. The investigator prepares a report. Discipline is imposed, if necessary, and everyone moves on.
Except that everyone may not move on.
A recent Ontario Labour Relations Board decision, Braganza v. Randstad Canada, is an expensive reminder that the consequences and costs of a workplace complaint can continue long after the investigation has formally ended.
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
The case illustrates a point employers sometimes overlook: terminating an employee who has made a protected workplace complaint can constitute reprisal if the employer cannot establish that the complaint played no role whatsoever in the decision.
FP Work touches on HR strategy, labour economics, office culture, technology and more.
The complaint need not have played a substantial role. The Board held that, even where an employer has legitimate reasons for termination, if the protected activity was a factor in the decision, “no matter how small,” it violates Section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).
The price for Randstad was significant.
The applicant in the case was an operations manager at Randstad. In June 2022, she made a workplace harassment complaint involving several colleagues.
Randstad retained an experienced external investigator...
Taking your tablets and checking your sugar is only part of living with diabetes. Every day you also decide what to eat, what to trust, and whether the medicine is even necessary. Increasingly, th...