Skip to content

Brought to you by

Dentons logo

Canadian Employment & Labour Law

Making the law work for your workplace.

open menu close menu

Canadian Employment & Labour Law

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Topics
    • Topics
    • Labour
    • Workplace investigations

Workplace investigations must be fair: Rushing to judgment can have costly consequences for employers

By Alison Walsh and Jenny Wang
July 13, 2022
  • Workplace investigations
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn

While employers are not held to a perfect standard when conducting a workplace investigation, investigations must be conducted with procedural fairness and good faith. Common errors made by employers conducting workplace investigations that have been identified by Canadian courts include:

  • Failing to act impartially;
  • Rushing to judgment before obtaining the facts;
  • Failing to be transparent or honest with the accused employee during the investigation process;
  • Failing to provide particulars of allegations to an accused employee;
  • Failing to provide the accused employee with an adequate opportunity to explain or respond;
  • Failing to consider an employee’s responses;
  • Failing to interview witnesses with potentially relevant information;
  • Failing to consider other evidence, such as emails, text messages, surveillance or computer records, which might be relevant to the investigation; and
  • Failing to follow the employer’s own policies regarding the conduct of workplace investigations.

A poor investigation can create legal risks for the employer. If an employer terminates an employee for misconduct but fails to properly investigate the misconduct, this may jeopardize the employer’s ability to defend a wrongful dismissal claim. A poor investigation can also expose an employer to liability for punitive or aggravated damages for breaching the employer’s obligation to treat the employee fairly in the manner of dismissal.

For example, in Doyle v Zochem Inc., 2017 ONCA 130, the employee sued their former employer for wrongful dismissal after being terminated following a complaint that they were being sexually harassed by a co-worker. The court found that the employee had been sexually harassed and that the employer had done a “cursory” investigation, hearing only from the respondent and failing to give the employee an opportunity to respond prior to their dismissal. The court awarded the employee CA$60,000 in moral damages, which was upheld on appeal.

In Elgert v Home Hardware Stores Ltd., 2011 ABCA 112, an employee sued their former employer for wrongful dismissal after being terminated for cause following an investigation into a complaint that they had sexually harassed a co-worker. The court found that the investigator selected had no training in dealing with sexual harassment complaints and had never conducted a sexual harassment investigation. The court also found that the investigator lacked neutrality (they were friends with the complainant’s father), the employee was not provided with particulars of the allegations prior to the interview or an adequate opportunity to respond, no efforts were made to investigate witnesses with potentially relevant information, and the investigator failed to follow the employer’s policies on workplace investigations. The employee was initially awarded CA$200,000 in punitive damages by a jury, which was reduced to CA$75,000 on appeal.

Alternatively, in Morgan v University of Waterloo, 2013 HRTO 1644, no damages were awarded against the employer as it was found that the employer had taken the employee’s allegations of sexual harassment seriously. In reaching this conclusion, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal noted that the employer had conducted an investigation in accordance with its policy, the employer had minimized contact between the complainant and respondent during the investigation, and the investigator had met with numerous witnesses and prepared a substantive investigation report. As a result, despite the tribunal disagreeing with the investigator’s conclusion and finding that the complainant had been sexually harassed, the respondent was solely responsible for damages owed to the complainant.

Take away

Employers should ensure that investigations are conducted by someone with the knowledge and training on how to conduct an appropriate investigation in the circumstances. Dentons can assist you from the planning stage through to conducting the investigation and writing an investigation report. We also provide practical training for management and human resource professionals on how to conduct fair and effective investigations.

If you have any questions about conducting a workplace investigation or workplace investigation training resources, or any other employment and labour questions, please reach out to Alison Walsh and Jenny Wang.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn
Subscribe and stay updated
Receive our latest blog posts by email.
Stay in Touch
Employment and Labour
Alison Walsh

About Alison Walsh

Alison Walsh is a partner in Dentons Canada LLP’s Employment and Labour group. She provides strategic and practical advice on all areas affecting the employment relationship. Alison assists her clients on sensitive workplace matters including workplace discrimination and harassment complaints, conducts workplace investigations, and provides support to employers conducting internal investigations. In addition, Alison regularly represents employers in all areas of labour and employment litigation, including wrongful dismissal matters, human rights complaints, grievance arbitrations and unfair competition claims.

All posts Full bio

Jenny Wang

About Jenny Wang

Jenny Wang (She/Her/Hers) is an associate in Dentons’ Employment and Labour and Intellectual Property and Technology practice groups and she can provide service to clients who speak mandarin (普通话). Based in Edmonton, her developing practice includes advising clients in relation to a broad range of employment and labour matters such as employment litigation (including wrongful dismissal and constructive dismissal claims), human rights complaints, and union grievances. Among other matters, Jenny’s intellectual property practice encompasses the trademarks process and any accompanying litigation.

All posts Full bio

RELATED POSTS

  • Workplace investigations

Workplace gossip and investigations: What employers can learn from McGraw v Southgate (Township)

By Emily Kroboth
  • General
  • Workplace investigations

Workplace investigations: What employers should consider when choosing an investigator

By Alison Walsh and Jenny Wang
  • General
  • Workplace investigations

« J’ai reçu une plainte d’intimidation et de harcèlement : que faire? » – Sept étapes que les employeurs canadiens peuvent suivre en cas de plainte

By Victoria Merritt

About Dentons

Dentons is designed to be different. As the world’s largest law firm with 20,000 professionals in over 200 locations in more than 80 countries, we can help you grow, protect, operate and finance your business. Our polycentric and purpose-driven approach, together with our commitment to inclusion, diversity, equity and ESG, ensures we challenge the status quo to stay focused on what matters most to you. www.dentons.com

Dentons boilerplate image

Twitter

Categories

  • Amendments to Safety Laws
  • Confidentiality/Trade Secrets
  • Constructive Dismissal
  • COVID-19
  • Criminal Offences by Employees
  • Employment Standards
  • Executive Compensation
  • General
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Labour
  • Occupational Health and Safety
  • Pay Equity
  • Pensions and Benefits
  • Privacy
  • Restrictive Covenants
  • Union Issues
  • Workers' Compensation
  • Workplace investigations
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • WSIB

Subscribe and stay updated

Receive our latest blog posts by email.

Stay in Touch

Dentons logo

© 2023 Dentons

  • Legal notices
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies on this site