[2013] 3 F.C.R. D-8
RCMP
Judicial review of Royal Canadian Mounted Police Assistant Commissioner’s decision that applicant’s allegation of workplace harassment unfounded—Applicant, member of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), holding rank of staff sergeant—Successfully competing in officer candidate selection process, placed on candidate list for senior commissioned positions—Meeting with acting Director for Executive/Officer Development and Resourcing (EODR) regarding promotion—Initial meeting therewith very positive but subsequent meeting very unfavourable—Applicant never appointed to commissioned ranks as hoped for—Applicant previously involved in internal disciplinary proceeding in which admitted to improper storage of firearm, disciplined by adjudication board—Evidence showing that EODR director speaking with adjudication board chair regarding applicant’s disciplinary proceeding—Applicant filing harassment complaint against adjudication board chair pursuant to RCMP’s harassment policy on grounds of unfounded rumours; alleging discredited, damaged applicant’s career when chair sharing with EODR director rumours regarding applicant’s disciplinary proceedings—Harassment complaint decision determining that EODR director learning about rumours before speaking to chair; that fact chair confirming rumours insufficient to constitute harassment—Applicant also filing internal grievance against harassment decision—That process ongoing—Whether Federal Court should exercise discretion to decline jurisdiction; whether applicant denied procedural fairness; whether harassment decision unreasonable—Courts generally not interfering with ongoing administrative process when adequate alternative remedy provided—Appointment to position or rank constituting remedy for grievance herein; thus, grievance procedure determined adequate remedy—Adequacy of alternative remedy also depending on timeliness since grievance, harassment procedures intended to be expeditious—Delays in question stretching tolerance for harassment, grievance procedures to be considered adequate alternative remedy to judicial review—Context, which includes substance of complaint, consequences of behaviour in question for complainant also examined—Since injury to promotional opportunity late in career at issue, grievance procedure potentially perceived as no remedy whatsoever—While delays close to rendering alternative remedy ineffective, not possible for Federal Court to give remedy advancing resolution of issues in present case—RCMP free within reason to determine own procedures—While applicant prefering greater disclosure earlier in process, requirements of procedural fairness not applying with full force in all circumstances—Harassment policies intended to be efficacious, non-adversarial—Provided minimal requirements met, respondent to be accorded some latitude in tailoring process—Therefore, principles of procedural fairness not breached herein—However, harassment decision not addressing issue raised by applicant; dismissing complaint on irrelevant considerations; not considering material facts—Chair’s acknowledgement of rumour, role as chair, suggestion that EODR director follow up with RCMP lawyer who prosecuted earlier internal disciplinary proceeding needed to be assessed globally—Harassment decision failing to meet criteria of intelligibility, justification, transparency—Nevertheless, grievance procedure providing highly effective remedy (applicant’s appointment to rank) not available on judicial review—Application dismissed.
Boogaard v. Canada (Attorney General) (T-2038-11, 2013 FC 267, Rennie J., judgment dated March 13, 2013, 17 pp.)