Annual Report on the Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace 2006-07

December 2007

Introduction

This annual report reviews the implementation of the Treasury Board's Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace (the Policy) in federal departments and organizations during the fiscal year 2006-07. The Policy's objective is to foster a respectful workplace through the prevention and prompt resolution of harassment.

The Policy applies to all departments and organizations (referred to as departments in this report) as defined in Schedule I of the Financial Administration Act, and the other portions of the federal public administration named in Schedule IV of the Financial Administration Act, thus covering approximately 194,000 employees in the period covered by this report. These departments are asked to report annually to the Canada Public Service Agency (CPSA) on harassment complaints that are filed under the Policy.

This report provides a portrait of activities related to the Policy in federal departments and organizations. It is based on information submitted to the CPSA from 74 of the 75 departments and organizations that were subject to the Policy and eligible to report for the reporting year, representing 99% of the core federal public service. Findings are presented for the following three key areas: prevention and training; overview of complaints; and the complaint resolution process.

For the 2006-07 reporting year, the CPSA used an online data submission system to facilitate reporting. Departmental policy coordinators have access to an online annual reporting template where they can submit information regarding harassment complaints handled and activities undertaken to support the Policy in their organizations, and update or revise the information at any time during the reporting period.

Prevention and Training

• Training of employees: Departmental training and learning activities related to the Policy focused on new employees and managers. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of departments reported having provided training or other learning opportunities for their employees and/or managers in relation to the Policy. Of those departments who provided mandatory or non-mandatory training, the training hours per employee varied from 5 hours to 16 hours. Close to 8% (approximately 15,000) of the public service employees (including managers) covered by this report received training related to the Policy during this reporting year. Theseactivitiesincluded:
  • Training courses or information sessions on the prevention and resolution of workplace harassment, either in-house (such as sessions as part of the orientation program for new employees or professional development programs) or those externally provided (such as the one-day Creating a Respectful Workplace course that is offered by the Canada School of Public Service);
  • Broader training courses (such as those on values and ethics, labour relations, conflict resolution) that include a component on harassment in the workplace;
  • Information sessions on the Informal Conflict Management System (ICMS) or the Public Service Modernization Act that include a component on the Policy and harassment in the workplace;
  • Online training using the online course on harassment prevention developed by the CPSA, People to People Communication;
  • Staff and/or management meetings to discuss issues related to the prevention and resolution of workplace harassment; and
  • Joint delivery of one- and two-day Joint Learning Program courses.

Several departments that did not undertake learning activities specifically related to harassment in the workplace reported having held training or information sessions in relevant areas such as workplace wellness, diversity, and dealing with difficult people.

By the end of the reporting year, 23 of 74 departments(30%) had made Policy-related training mandatory either for managers only, or for employees and managers both.

• Communications: Only 12 of 74 departments(16%) reported having communicated the Policy and relevant information to their employees on occasions other than at training or information sessions. This included the use of weekly newsletters, surveys, messages from the deputy head to all employees, posters, pamphlets, and pop-up messages on employees' computers.
• Network of Departmental Anti-Harassment Policy Coordinators: The CPSA continued in its role of managing the network and held two meetings of the network with a primary focus on reviewing, consulting and discussing the results of its Harassment Policy and System Review.
• Use of the Informal Conflict Management System: Twenty two percent of all complaints resolved in 2006-07 were resolved through informal means. Thirty-eight departments reported their general satisfaction with the use of the informal conflict management processes to deal with potential or actual harassment situations—20 indicated a high level of satisfaction, and 18 indicated a medium level of satisfaction.

Overview of Complaints

• Complaints filed: In 2006-07 a total of 597 harassment complaints were filed under the Policy by employees of departments covered by this report. The 597 complaints were filed at 34 departments. The remaining 40 departments reported that no harassment complaints were filed.
  • Of the total number of complaints in 2006-07, twenty three percent were filed at Correctional Service Canada (CSC). The annual number of complaints filed at CSC, while continuing to be the largest among all departments, has shown a steady decrease over the past three reporting years. In 2005-06, CSC had just under one third of all complaints filed, and in 2004-05 CSC accounted for almost one half of all complaints filed. In addition to a decline in the proportion of overall complaints filed within the Core Public Administration, CSC has also experienced a decline in the actual number of complaints filed within their department since 2004-05. This decline in the number of complaints filed coincides with a number of departmental initiatives, including the mandatory training program targeted at all CSC managers and employees that was launched in 2005-06. CSC intends to continue to work with unions and the CPSA to address harassment in the workplace, as it has in the past.
  • Preliminary review (screening): Of the 597 complaints filed in 2006-07, 335 complaints (56%) were accepted for further review under the Policy after preliminary review, compared to 316 out of 490 complaints (64%) in 2005-06. Approximately 195 complaints (33%) were rejected for reasons including: being unrelated to harassment; falling outside of the acceptable time frame stipulated by the Policy; missing details; being dealt with through other recourses; and being filed by a person who is not an employee of the department. This is comparable to the number of complaints rejected after preliminary review from 2005-06, where 130 complaints (27%) were rejected. Of the 195 complaints rejected, 32 complaints (16%) were redirected to other areas. Thirty two complaints (5%) were withdrawn.
  • The remaining 6% (35 complaints) were at the preliminary review stage as of March 31, 2007.

• Type of complaints: Harassment complaints of a general nature accounted for 64% of all complaints accepted for further action. Complaints involving alleged abuse of authority accounted for 24%. 9% of complaints were related to sexual harassment and the remaining 3% were based on grounds proscribed by the Canadian Human Rights Act.

•  Profiles of complainants and respondents: Of the complaints where the working relationship was specified, 270 (52%) were filed against the complainants' superiors, 193 (37%) were filed against coworkers and 24 (5%) were filed against subordinates. Thirty-three percent of complainants were from the operational group, 26% were from the professional group, 21% were from the administrative support group, 14% were non-EX employees who manage or supervise and 2% were senior managers. On the other hand, 42% of respondents were non-EX employees who manage or supervise, 15% were senior managers, 17% were from the professional group, 14% were from the operational group and 6% were from the administrative support group.

Complaint Resolution

• Complaints handled: Thirty-seven departments handled a total of 626 complaints including carry over from previous years. This includes complaints accepted for further review during the reporting year and complaints carried over from previous years. Of the 626 complaints handled in 2006-07, 338 were resolved, while 288 were ongoing as of March 31, 2007.
• Use of informal conflict resolution processes: Informal conflict resolution processes were attempted for 156 complaints in 27 departments, down slightly from 177 complaints in 38 departments in 2005-06, but up from 117 complaints in 21 departments in 2004-05. Approximately 22% of complaints resolved in 2006-07 were resolved through an informal resolution process, comparable to 25% of complaints resolved in 2005-06.
• Investigation: Investigation continues to be the primary mechanism for complaint resolution. Of the 338 complaints resolved in 2006-07, 218 (64%) were resolved through investigation. Ninety four complaints (43% of those resolved through investigation) were founded or partially founded. 124 complaints (57%) wereunfounded. In 2005-06, 176 complaints wereresolvedthrough investigation.
• Corrective and Disciplinary measures: Corrective measures were taken for 76 complaints that were determined to be fully or partially founded through investigation. Disciplinarymeasuresweretaken in 31 cases.^[1]
• Time taken for resolution: Resolution of complaints took longer than the Policy's proposed six-month time frame in 197 cases (55%), up from 199 cases (49%) in 2005-06 and from 83 cases (38%) in 2004-05. One hundred four complaints (29%) took longer than 12 months.

Departments noted a variety of reasons for the lengthy time taken for complaint resolution. As a major factor that caused delay in the resolution process, close to one quarter (23%) of departments (17) noted the slow progress of the investigation as a reason for the lengthy time to resolve the complaint. Twenty-two percent of departments (16) noted the absence of the complainant as a factor in delays. Other reasons for delays were: absence of the respondent (18%), limited access to investigators (8%), lack of resources (7%), limited access to mediators (4%), and other reasons (18%). Other reasons included the time required to have the investigation report vetted by access to information and privacy personnel, delays in receiving additional information from the complainant on the allegations, attempts to informally resolve the complaint, availability of a qualified investigator, and extensive travel time for an investigator, complainant, respondent or witnesses.

Conclusion

The CPSA, in collaboration with departments, continues to work towards achievement of the Policy's objectives by: revising the current Policy; creating better support tools in the areas of investigation, restoring the workplace, screening, learning and communication; improving linkages to the ICMS and examining the current Non-Represented Employee Advisory Program.

Annex: Departments and Organizations that Submitted a report in 2006-07

1.  Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency 2.  Canada Border Services Agency 3.  Canada Industrial Relations Board 4.  Canada School of Public Service 5.  Canada Public Service Agency 6.  Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal 7.  Canadian Dairy Commission 8.  Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 9.  Canadian Forces Grievance Board 10.  Canadian Grain Commission 11.  Canadian Human Rights Commission 12.  Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 13.  Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat 14.  Canadian International Development Agency 15.  Canadian International Trade Tribunal 16.  Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission 17.  Canadian Space Agency 18.  Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board 19.  Canadian Transportation Agency 20.  Copyright Board Canada 21.  Correctional Service Canada 22.  Courts Administration Service 23.  Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 24.  Canadian Heritage 25.  Citizenship and Immigration Canada 26.  Department of Finance Canada 27.  Fisheries and Oceans Canada 28.  Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada 29.  Health Canada 30.  Human Resources and Social Development Canada 31.  Indian and Northern Affairs Canada 32.  Industry Canada 33.  Department of Justice Canada 34.  National Defence 35.  Natural Resources Canada 36.  Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada 37.  Public Works and Government Services Canada

38.  Environment Canada 39.  Transport Canada 40.  Veterans Affairs Canada 41.  Western Economic Diversification Canada 42.  Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions 43.  Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission 44.  Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada 45.  International Joint Commission 46.  Library and Archives Canada 47.  Military Police Complaints Commission 48.  NAFTA Secretariat – Canadian Section 49.  National Farm Products Council 50.  National Parole Board 51.  Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada 52.  Office of Infrastructure of Canada 53.  Office of the Chief Electoral Officer 54.  Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs 55.  Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages 56.  Office of the Co-ordinator, Status of Women 57.  Office of the Secretary to the Governor General 58.  Office of the Information Commissioner 59.  Office of the Privacy Commissioner 60.  Office of the Registrar of Lobbiysts 61.  Patented Medicine Prices Review Board 62.  Privy Council Office 63.  Public Health Agency of Canada 64.  Public Service Commission of Canada 65.  Public Service Staffing Tribunal 66.  Registry of the Competition Tribunal 67.  Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Civilian Staff) 68.  Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee 69.  Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission 70.  Service Canada 71.  Statistics Canada 72.  Supreme Court of Canada 73.  Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada 74.  Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat

[1].  The data on disciplinary measures was gathered by the Labour Relations Sector of the Treasury Board Secretariat.