# 2020-019 Careers, Initial Counselling

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2021–04–08

The grievor believed the Initial Counselling (IC) for Conduct that he received was not in accordance with Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAOD) 5019-4, Remedial Measures. He believed the IC was issued based on what he viewed as a flawed and biased investigation into allegations of harassment levied against him by a subordinate. The grievor argued that there were multiple breaches of procedural fairness by both the harassment investigator and the Responsible Officer (RO) and that he could not understand why the version of the complainant was accepted over his. The grievor questioned whether the RO was the real decision-maker in this case as he appeared to solely rely on the investigator's conclusions and provided insufficient analysis of his reasons.  

There was no Initial Authority decision for this grievance. The grievor requested that his grievance be referred directly to the Final Authority (FA).   

The Committee obtained additional information from the RO, who is also the grievor's Commanding Officer, who indicated that in reaching his decision, he considered the findings of the harassment investigation as presented in the report, as well as all the evidence in support of the investigation, including audio recordings of the interviews. The RO stated that he was satisfied that both the complainant and the grievor, through the interview summaries, had the information they needed to prepare their representations and he expressed confidence that the investigator treated the interviewees appropriately and fairly, and that each perspective was considered when compiling the report. The RO provided detailed reasons in his determination that the harassment definition was met for two of the six allegations, which justified that a remedial measure be administered to the grievor. He indicated that he opted for an IC since the grievor had no record of previous remedial measure related to harassment. 

After a review of the evidence and considering the grievor himself admitted to making the complainant uncomfortable in the workplace at certain times, the Committee found that the RO was correct in his determination that two of the six allegations met the criteria laid out in the DAOD 5012-0 and that the evidence supports the finding of harassment on a balance of probabilities.

The Committee also found that the decision made by the RO to issue the grievor an IC was appropriate and was based on reliable evidence and in accordance with DAOD 5019-4.  

The Committee concluded that the grievor had not been aggrieved and found that the investigation had been conducted appropriately. The Committee therefore recommended the grievor be denied redress.