First Reference company logo

First Reference Talks

News and Discussions on Payroll, HR & Employment Law

decorative image

Q&A: Who may be hired as a third party investigator to deal with workplace harassment complaints?

third party investigatorIn this conference Q&A, we address relevant considerations when choosing a third party investigator.

In partnership with Stringer LLP, First Reference Inc. recently hosted the 19th Annual Employment Law Conference on June 12, 2018, where we discussed the latest legal developments including issues surrounding workplace harassment complaints and investigations.

We received a large number of questions from conference attendees during the Q&A session. Though we could not answer them all during the conference, the First Reference Blog will be updated weekly to provide further clarity on this year’s hot topics based on the questions we received.


Is there any legislation that dictates who may/may not be hired as a third party investigator?


To provide context for this question, workplace harassment is prohibited by Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) in addition to the prohibition by Ontario’s Human Rights Code where the harassment is tied to a protected ground. Coupled with an employer’s obligation to ensure a safe workplace, the OHSA requires employers to investigate, as appropriate in the circumstances, incidents of workplace harassment upon becoming aware of such incidents through a worker or a written or verbal complaint alleging workplace harassment.

While the legislation requires that the person conducting the investigation should know the applicable laws about workplace harassment and reprisal provisions under the OHSA and should have received information and instruction on the employer’s workplace harassment policy and program, it does not elaborate to specify who may or may not be hired as a third party investigator.

As a result, employers and professionals in the field are left to fill in the blanks with guidance from case law and Part IV of Ontario’s Ministry of Labour’s Code of Practice. Drawing from these sources of best practices, when choosing an internal or external investigator, employers should ensure the investigator is knowledgeable, competent and well trained on how to handle an investigation specifically on workplace harassment and sexual harassment. Moreover, the investigator should be sufficiently removed from the alleged harasser’s direct control in order to conduct an impartial and objective investigation.

This is especially important as many of the decisions that have awarded damages against the employer for improper investigations arose from failing to follow and comply with procedural fairness. For example, as seen in Elgert v Home Hardware, 2011 ABCA 112 (CanLii), a biased investigation resulted in a punitive damage award against the employer, prompting the Court to clarify that an investigator’s role is to be impartial, neutral and objective. In awarding punitive damage, the Court reasoned that the investigator had no experience conducting workplace investigations, was a close friend of the complainant’s father, interviewed only one of the complainants and failed to interview relevant witnesses, and had prematurely concluded guilt before speaking to the alleged harasser as his employment was suspended with pay prior to the completion of the investigation.

In contrast, the Tribunal decision in Morgan v University of Waterloo exemplifies that choosing the right investigator can potentially shield employers from liability. Despite the Tribunal’s finding that the alleged harassment did in fact occur, the University was not faulted for arriving at the opposite conclusion and avoided damages for improper investigation because it had taken the complaint seriously, moved the alleged harasser to another location during the investigation and engaged a qualified investigator with expertise in human rights who interviewed all relevant parties and thoroughly documented the process and findings in a substantive report.

Consult The Human Resources Advisor Ontario edition for a more in-depth discussion on compliance and best practices on the topic of workplace harassment complaints and investigations.

Please Note: This article is prepared for information purposes only; it is not legal advice. Consult a lawyer before acting on it or to obtain legal advice or a legal opinion.

Follow me

Ava Z Moradi, JD

Editor at First Reference
Ava Moradi, JD, received a Juris Doctor (J.D.) at the University of Windsor, Faculty of Law in 2014. She is a writer, researcher and editor in employment and labour law at First Reference. She is one of the content editors for The Human Resources Advisor, Ontario, Western and Atlantic editions and a contributor to First Reference Talks and HRinfodesk.
Follow me

, , , ,

Comments are currently closed.

2 thoughts on “Q&A: Who may be hired as a third party investigator to deal with workplace harassment complaints?
  • I am sorry but part of your comment is wrong. There is no such requirement for an individual to be licensed to do a workplace investigation anywhere in Canada, whether the investigation is internal or external. Having a trained investigator does not require the trainer to be licensed. It requires the investigator (internal or external) to be adequately trained and experienced to evaluate the evidence and reach a conclusion supported by the evidence. Therefore, as stated by the Association of Workplace Investigator “he or she must be skilled in assessing credibility and weighing corroborative, circumstantial and similar fact evidence. The investigator must also be able to figure out when forensic expertise is required to gather, preserve and analyse evidence. In addition to evidentiary issues, the investigator must know how to appropriately deal with unexpected hurdles such as uncooperative witnesses, possible retaliation against a party, privacy issues, and third parties seeking to meddle in or control the investigation.”

  • Kellie Auld says:

    Somehow or other this original post escaped me; however, I would like to add that if a third-party is going to be contracted – employers should ensure they are licensed as that is a requirement in Ontario as well as many other provinces in Canada (Manitoba appears to be an exception for some reason). I have also seen federal situations in which an internal investigators findings were challenged because the manager did not have appropriate training. It would be worthwhile to research what is meant by ‘competent’ investigator under various legislation (has the requisite knowledge, skills and experience). If training is going to be undertaken, ensure you have engaged the right people to conduct the training.