Workplace Investigations at SFU
After recently helping a member, I was reminded how far we’ve come as an advocacy organization for our members.
A Little History, A Little Background
When I first began volunteering for APSA as an advocate in 2014, I was asked to help a member who was the subject of a workplace investigation by SFU. If you’re not familiar with workplace investigations (or fact-finding investigations), employers such as SFU can conduct investigations into alleged workplace infractions. This could be for something like unprofessional conduct or even something more serious, like insubordination or financial mismanagement. Sometimes such investigations are done in-house by Human Resources or Labour Relations representatives; in many cases, more serious allegations are conducted by neutral, third-party investigators. The results of an investigation can have the potential for workplace discipline, so we are especially mindful of how investigations are conducted for our members.
Back to 2014…. I joined our member in a private room with H.R. representatives and, to my shock, our member was provided with a very brief incident report, which they (and I) had ten minutes to read before the line of questioning was to begin. We were told that we couldn’t have a copy of the report or even take a photo of it; we were denied receipt of any allegations of wrongdoing and vigorously discouraged from adjourning to review what limited information we had received. In terms of due process and fairness for our member, the entire meeting felt completely inappropriate, and I reported what happened to my predecessor, Anne Mason.
In the years since then, especially in my executive director role, we’ve continued to insist on due process and basic fairness for APSA members who find themselves involved in a workplace investigation.
Some Tips for You
I want to give you some idea of things we watch out for when it comes to workplace investigations. I’m not a lawyer, so my brief overview is based on my experience in my role as an advocate for APSA members and the assistance we’ve received from APSA’s legal counsel over the years. As you’ll read on, the three concepts below overlap and are very intertwined.
Due Process: a workplace investigation must follow established rules and principles of fairness, ensuring consistent and impartial treatment. For APSA, key aspects include providing allegations of wrongdoing prior to the investigation, providing members the opportunity to be heard, and requiring an unbiased decision to protect against arbitrary deprivation of your rights.
Procedural Fairness: This concept is closely allied with due process. The emphasis on procedural fairness is that decisions made before, during, and after a workplace investigation are arrived at through a fair and impartial process. The concept is not about the outcome being favourable, but rather about the process being just, consistent, and respectful, allowing members to understand and respond to matters affecting their rights, interests and terms and conditions of employment.
Natural Justice: Natural justice has a strong procedural application in English common law. As it might apply to a workplace investigation, natural justice is about ensuring that the proceedings are free from bias and fair.
What Are Some of the Things We Look Out for in Investigations?
Who Does the Investigating: Generally speaking, the complainant (for example, if your supervisor had concerns and wanted to investigate you) shouldn’t be the one doing the investigating and/or reaching conclusions based on the investigation’s findings. At APSA, we press very keenly to have investigations conducted by neutral, third-party investigators to ensure the proceedings are bias-free, among other concerns.
Retaliation: we safeguard the investigative proceedings to ensure that University representatives (and others) aren’t in any way retaliating against members who may be a complainant, a respondent or a witness. Hypothetical example: if a University representative or investigator spoke in a disrespectful or defamatory way about the complainant, respondent or witnesses, that would be highly inappropriate and quickly opposed by APSA.
Timely Receipt of Allegations: If University representatives allege that one of our members has done something wrong, we request the detailed allegations well prior to any investigatory proceedings. That way, we can review them with our member and prepare them for any investigatory interviews with University representatives.
Last Thoughts
The good news is that workplace investigations at SFU have improved since 2014 and while there’s still room for improvement, we’re always here to ensure that your rights are respected. If you should have any questions or concerns, meetings with us are always 100% confidential.