FEWO Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
PREVALENCE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACEA. DataThe Committee was told that there is a dearth of recent data on sexual harassment in Canada, including data for workplaces in general and the federal realm specifically.[155] The Committee heard that the last major study that included a focus on sexual harassment in Canada, entitled the Violence Against Women Survey (VAWS), was conducted in 1993.[156] As the Committee learned, current data available and provided to the Committee came from three main sources:
Witnesses noted that a meaningful set of data, consistently collected and valid, is important because it shows where problems exist in a workplace and provides the employer with an opportunity to address the issues.[157] As one witness stated, “you can’t address a problem if you don’t know the extent of the problem.”[158] Understanding the gap between policy and reality depends on asking more questions, collecting more data in greater detail and sharing experiences with regards to sexual harassment in the workplace.[159] The Committee was told that an organization that demonstrates that it collects important data in a consistent manner will have greater credibility among employees in terms of how it responds to complaints of sexual harassment.[160] Without any conclusive data, the Committee heard that there are important gaps in the understanding of sexual harassment in Canada. In particular, it is impossible to know changes over time or gain a reliable current-day picture of the situation.[161] One witness indicated that both quantitative and qualitative data should be collected; as she explained “we need to hear the stories and we need to understand the numbers.”[162] Witnesses highlighted that a central challenge to the collection of data is that cases of sexual harassment remain under-reported, as discussed in greater detail below, in subsection “Under-reporting”.[163] The Committee heard that a major misconception is that a workplace with few complaints has no problem with sexual harassment.[164] Rather, witnesses told the Committee, the number of complaints may not reflect the actual situation,[165] and it is important to solicit employees’ views, through mechanisms such as surveys, to see whether the workplace is truly “healthy”.[166] For example, the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is planning on conducting an anonymous employee satisfaction survey for its staff, administered by an outside firm, which will include questions about harassment.[167] The Committee heard that more recent and comprehensive data should be obtained before any long-term projects addressing sexual harassment are launched.[168] In addition, the effectiveness of training programs on sexual harassment in the workplace should be assessed using quantitative data collected both before and after the programs are delivered.[169] The Committee also heard that detailed data can be used to assist future victims of harassment, as it can give possible complainants important information.[170] Victims of sexual harassment are less likely to report it if they do not have access, in a confidential manner, to a source of well-defined and impartial information on the options for reporting, the processes, the legal remedies, and possible challenges.[171] The Committee received data from departments and agencies with varying results. Specific data has been provided on the RCMP and DND in the earlier section on the legal and regulatory framework for those organizations. As discussed earlier in the report, the military personnel of the CF were not included in the PSES. 1. The Public Service Employee SurveyA number of witnesses made reference to the PSES, which has been conducted by Statistics Canada, on behalf of the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, every three years since 1999.[172] Statistics Canada describes the PSES as follows: The Public Service Employee Survey was designed to solicit the views of Public Service employees on their work environment and overall job satisfaction. Employees expressed their opinions on their work units, their communications with their supervisors, skills and career aspirations, client services and labour management relations.[173] The most recent PSES was conducted from 29 August to 7 October 2011. It was distributed to approximately 300,000 employees and had a response rate of 72.2%, reported to be the highest response rate since the first survey in 1999.[174] According to the Director of Special Surveys at Statistics Canada, the survey is for all employees working in 90 federal departments and agencies; including “the organizations … for which the Treasury Board is the employer, or organizations where the Treasury Board is not the employer but the organization wished to participate anyway.”[175] The PSES provided respondents with the following definition of harassment, supplied by the Treasury Board Secretariat: Harassment is any improper conduct by an individual, that is directed at and offensive to another person or persons in the workplace, and that the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It comprises any objectionable act, comment or display that demeans, belittles, or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment, and any act of intimidation or threat. It includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act.[176] The 97-question survey included 5 questions specific to harassment:
Two other questions could be relevant to harassment issues:
Witnesses indicated that the 2011 PSES did not provide information on specific types of harassment, including sexual harassment.[177] The PSAC recommended that a specific question on sexual harassment be included in the next PSES:[178] [A] specific question on sexual harassment should be added to the Survey. In addition, to understand the extent of the problem in the workplace, more specific questions need to be asked to identify the extend of sexual harassment in the federal public service; if and why there is an under-reporting of sexual harassment; the effectiveness of the processes in place, and the outcomes of harassment cases and settlements.[179] The Director of Special Surveys at Statistics Canada explained that focus group testing in 2008 demonstrated that it would be possible to “actually measure type of harassment” in the survey.[180] The concerns with adding such questions were the effect on the time series and comparability of the data from one survey to the next[181] and the link between the number of questions and the response rate.[182] As the Committee heard from Treasury Board officials, the public service-wide survey results indicated that 29% of respondents reported having experienced harassment at least once in the previous two years.[183] Of those, 63% reported having experienced harassment from co-workers, and 67% reported having experienced harassment from individuals with authority over them. These percentages were largely unchanged from the 2008 results. Only 11% of respondents disagreed that their department or agency works hard to create a workplace that prevents harassment.[184] Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with the following statement: “I feel I can initiate a formal recourse process (grievance, complaint, appeal, etc.) without fear of reprisal.” Just over half responded positively. Sixty percent responded positively to the statement related to satisfaction with the way in which informal complaints on workplace issues are resolved.[185] Although the PSES captures employees’ perceptions, a witness noted that even if harassment is merely perceived, and not founded, it has an impact on the complainant.[186] The Assistant Deputy Minister of the Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat, commenting on the result that 29% of respondents perceived having been harassed in the past two years, the same as in the 2008 PSES, told the Committee: We were quite disappointed with the results of the survey this year with respect to that aspect. This has been a persistent result in previous public service surveys as well. We are designing the 2014 survey now, and [a question on sexual harassment] is certainly a question we’ll be looking at.[187] On the same subject, he added: [W]e do want to have a look at that in a little more depth, because it’s in contrast to what we know about reported cases. When more than a quarter of the public service is identifying that they feel they have been harassed, there’s a disconnect there, and we need to get to the root of it.[188] He noted that the PSES “had another question in the survey about employees feeling free to initiate complaint processes and formal processes, and 40% of our employees said they were reluctant to do so. We think there’s a connection between the two.”[189] He said “this is an area that we will be looking into for possible additional questions.”[190] Recommendation 2 The Committee recommends that specific questions on sexual harassment be included in the next Public Service Employee Survey to determine the following: identify and understand the extent of the problem of sexual harassment in the workplace; determine if and why there is an under-reporting of sexual harassment; assess the effectiveness of the processes in place; and find out the outcomes of harassment cases and settlements. 2. Statistics Canada’s 1993 Violence Against Women SurveyThe Committee heard that the most recent reliable and comprehensive data on violence against women in Canada, which included sexual harassment, is from the 1993 VAWS.[191] According to the Statistics Canada website, the VAWS was a: [O]ne-time-only survey [which] examines the safety of women both inside and outside the home – perceptions of fear, sexual harassment, sexual violence, physical violence and threats by strangers, dates/boyfriends, other known men, husbands and common-law partners.[192] The target population for the survey was all women 18 years of age or older, excluding residents of the territories and full-time residents of institutions. The survey contacted approximately 19,000 eligible households, and obtained 12,300 interviews, which is a response rate of 54%.[193] The Committee was told that only one major study was conducted on the incidence and nature of work-related sexual harassment in Canada, using the data obtained from the 1993 survey.[194] This 1994 study, entitled “Work-related sexual harassment”, concluded with: According to the Violence Against Women Survey, over a 12-month period work-related sexual harassment affected 6% of working women. Young women and unmarried women were the most vulnerable to harassment. Rates varied between full- and part-time workers, but personal or household income had little relation to the likelihood of being harassed. The lifetime rate of workplace sexual harassment was much higher than the past year’s rate. Well over two million women reported having experienced at least one incident during their working lives.[195] One witness spoke of her analysis of the 1993 survey and other Canadian data at the time, and noted that depending on the data, the lifetime sexual harassment prevalence rate at that time, or the chances that a woman would experience harassment over her lifetime, was between 23% and 51%.[196] Witnesses recommended launching a national survey to follow up on the 1993 VAWS,[197] and to include men in this survey.[198] One academic encouraged the federal government to allow researchers to participate in collecting national data, in order to improve baseline understanding and identify new trends.[199] Vicky Smallman, National Director of the Women’s and Human Rights Department of the Canadian Labour Congress, explained: The last source of decent data that we have on sexual harassment in the workplace is the 1993 “Violence Against Women Survey”. We're coming up to the 20th anniversary of this survey, so perhaps it would be a good time to recommend that we launch a new survey.[200] 3. Other Sources of InformationOfficials from the Labour Program of the then Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, HRSDC, (the department is now commonly known as Employment and Social Development Canada)[201] told the Committee that the department does not collect data specifically on sexual harassment, although as mandated by the Canada Labour Code, it keeps data specific to its intervention activities for inspection or investigation.[202] The Committee was informed that there is nothing in the Code that requires employers to report complaints of sexual harassment or violence in the workplace.[203] As explained by a Director for HRSDC, “the employers maintain the responsibility of recording, reporting, and investigating these complaints and do not have to report those to us.”[204] The Committee was given statistics from the Federal Jurisdiction Workplace Survey, a Statistics Canada survey, inactive since 2008, with the object of collecting “statistical information on working conditions in companies under federal labour code jurisdiction.”[205] According to the most recent data:
The Committee heard that DND has two kinds of survey procedures; the first is an internal research capability that conducts specialized focused surveys administered on an as-required basis, and the second is continuous surveys, in which a sample population is surveyed regularly on a range of topics.[207] 4. Role of Status of Women Canada with Respect to Sexual Harassment in the Federal WorkplaceStatus of Women Canada describes itself as “a federal government organization that promotes equality for women and their full participation in the economic, social and democratic life of Canada.”[208] It is responsible for “providing strategic policy advice and gender-based analysis support”, in addition to administering the women’s program and promoting special days related to women.[209] The Committee heard that Status of Women Canada used to be more involved in analysis of data, research and reports.[210] Some witnesses suggested that Status of Women Canada could promote better understanding of sexual harassment through the development of definitions and research[211] or by playing a role in the collection of data on the prevalence and nature of sexual harassment in Canada.[212] Jennifer Berdahl, a professor at the University of Toronto who appeared as an individual, elaborated on the possible role of the agency: Status of Women Canada can offer guidelines and definitions of the problem and the nature of it, by defining sexual harassment broadly…, pointing out that the very overt sexual forms that we can all recognize are only the tip of the iceberg and that this is a systemic problem that affects both women and men in the workplace.[213] The Committee also heard from Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology and Vice-Dean at the Graduate Education and Program Reviews in the Faculty of Arts and Science, at the University of Toronto: In terms of data, there was a time when Status of Women Canada was more involved in data, research, and reports. At one point I participated in writing a chapter for a report for Status of Women Canada on the Canadian Human Rights Commission. I would encourage [Status of Women Canada’s] involvement in some of those issues where they are relevant, particularly in terms of surveys or qualitative data collection.[214] 5. Data Collection and Alternative Dispute Resolution MechanismsWitnesses told the Committee that data are not usually kept on cases of sexual harassment that are resolved informally, often through alternative dispute resolution processes.[215] For example, the House of Commons offers an informal route called Finding Solutions Together, but as a result, Human Resources does not keep track of statistics related to these cases.[216] A representative from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) said that CBC keeps informal records for informal complaints, but the records are generally destroyed if the complaint is withdrawn or if the employees settle the matter between themselves.[217] The Canadian Auto Workers union stated: Most harassment concerns/complaints in our workplaces are resolved at [the] informal level [and are] hence not recorded.[218] As well, the RCMP Public Complaints Commission stated that there is no record kept of cases that are resolved informally; the Commission recommended that the RCMP start to maintain such records.[219] As Mr. McPhail of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission explained: The collection of data is necessary to give the Commissioner and the senior leadership of the RCMP the information they need, because you can't address a problem if you don't know the extent of the problem.[220] 6. ConfidentialityAnother challenge of data collection is confidentiality, described by one witness as the “black box” of complaint procedures.[221] The Committee heard that if a complaint is confidential, it should still be recorded in detail; particularly as the information could highlight a pattern over several years or provide information to other employees on how the employer deals with harassment.[222] In addition, some successfully resolved cases of sexual harassment require the complainant to sign a confidentiality agreement, and this practice occurs in some government departments and the RCMP. One of the consequences of this practice is that there is limited statistical information at the end of the year on the number of sexual harassment cases within an organization.[223] 7. Databases and Multiplicity of SourcesWitnesses described a multiplicity of sources on sexual harassment cases when gathering data and a variety of databases for keeping records on harassment. DND told the Committee that in preparation for its appearance, it had to go to multiple sources to retrieve data[224] and, without comparing every file, it was unsure whether there is duplication of information in these sources.[225] The Director General Military Personnel of DND explained that data sources include the Department’s tracking system for harassment complaints filed internally, its alternative dispute resolution database, statistics on human rights complaints filed with the CHRC, and periodic surveys of military members.[226] The Committee was informed that DND is currently trying to harmonize these databases.[227] The RCMP Public Complaints Commissioner recommended that the RCMP establish a “centralized system that collects all the data” on complaints, including information on what type of issue it is, what the allegations are, what resolution was sought, what happened to the complaints, what steps were followed in the resolution process, what the final resolution was, and any other details of the investigation.[228] Canada Post told the Committee that it has a new database to examine harassment statistics; it allows the organization to look at recorded incidents and see what regions, workplaces or positions have greater risks as related to harassment.[229] As explained by Jacqueline Rigg, Director General of the Civilian Human Resources Management Operations and Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian) of DND, the current Government of Canada human resources management system has limitations, but as part of the human resources modernization program, an upgraded version was expected to be established in 2013, which will enable improved capture and analysis of data.[230] However, as the system currently stands, “statistics have been generated by different tracking systems and do not permit any further in-depth analysis.”[231] 8. Exit InterviewsThe Committee heard that employers can access another source of valuable data through exit interviews or surveys.[232] Such information allows an employer to note areas for improvement or any systemic problems, including issues with sexual harassment.[233] However, a central challenge is that exit interviews are typically voluntary, which compromises the consistency of the data.[234] At DND, a voluntary open-ended exit survey has been offered for around 20 years.[235] The Committee heard that in 2011, the Library of Parliament introduced a practice to systematically capture exit interview data from departing employees.[236] Petty officer 1st class Shanna Wilson, National Military Co-Chair of the Defence Women’s Advisory Organization, spoke of the value of exit interviews: I think any exit interview should be reviewed. Keeping our people is a tough go. We're an employer for whom, certainly, our people are our main resource. If there are patterns specific to women, I think they should certainly be looked at.[237] 9. Specificity of DataThe Committee heard that many workplaces do not keep track of sexual harassment specifically. For example, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal does not keep data specific to sexual harassment.[238] The Employee Assistance Programs in some workplaces may provide data, but it is often high-level. For example, the Ontario Provincial Police can obtain statistical reports from the Employee Assistance Program, but no names are included, only the rank of the employees and type of counselling offered to them.[239] As well, the General Manager of Compliance at Canada Post explained that the organization can break down its data on harassment in a variety of ways, including by region and whether the harassment is employee-employee or employee-supervisor.[240] While it does not break down data based on sexual harassment cases, it does further classify data based on whether there was a discriminatory practice as defined under the Canadian Human Rights Act.[241] B. Under-ReportingThere was widespread agreement from witnesses that cases of sexual harassment remain under-reported.[242] As a result, the Committee heard that it was not possible to get a complete picture of the problem of sexual harassment from the number of complaints that are brought forward.[243] Specific to the public service, the Committee was told by the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Governance Planning and Policy Sector of the Treasury Board Secretariat that the PSES found a relatively high proportion of respondents indicated that they were unwilling to launch a complaint process in cases of perceived harassment.[244] According to a gender-based analysis of PSES results, approximately 30% of male employees and 32% of female employees disagreed with the statement: “I feel I can initiate a formal recourse process (grievance, complaint, appeal, etc.) without fear of reprisal.”[245] The Committee was told that while laws, policies and redress mechanisms can be effective in providing recourse to complainants of sexual harassment, they do little to protect those who, for whatever reason, are unwilling to speak out.[246] While important advances have been made, particularly in the provision of individualized legal remedies to address sexual harassment, ultimately it takes courage to file a complaint.[247] Reporting cases of sexual harassment is often a means of last resort, as many complainants do not feel safe making complaints or confident that the situation will be properly addressed.[248] Members of the Committee expressed concern about under-reporting of sexual harassment despite the existence of laws, policies and redress mechanisms to deal with the problem. Witnesses suggested that a policy often looks very good on paper, but there are challenges implementing those policies in reality.[249] The Committee was told that a low number of sexual harassment complaints in a workplace does not necessarily mean that sexual harassment is not a problem in that workplace.[250] While this could be the case, the number of complaints can give a distorted picture of the situation,[251] and it is important to solicit employees’ views, through mechanisms such as surveys, to see whether the workplace is truly healthy.[252] It was also noted by one witness that a victim can signal harassment in ways other than by reporting it; he or she might take an excessive number of days off, request to move offices, or take important steps to avoid the harasser.[253] As Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director of the Faculty of Education at the Western University’s Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children, explained: Clearly, we have made some important advances in our ability to speak out publicly about sexual harassment and in our provision of individualized legal remedies to address it. Equally clearly, we still have a long way to go before we reach equality in the workplace and before those who experience sexual harassment feel safe to report and confident that the situation will be appropriately addressed. The question becomes, how do we close the gap between policy and reality?[254] As elaborated in the following sections, witnesses provided the Committee with a number of elements that lead to the under-reporting of sexual harassment, those being:
1. The Reporting ProcessThe Committee was told that victims are more likely to come forward if they have access to multiple reporting channels, particularly more informal processes (such as ombudspeople), as it is daunting to proceed directly to filing a formal complaint.[255] However, the difficulty with multiple reporting channels, as highlighted by some witnesses, was the “legal runaround” or “passing the buck” experienced by some complainants of sexual harassment.[256] As one witness explained, depending on the workplace, a complainant could “find themselves bouncing around” from a union, to an internal complaint procedure, to a formal grievance process or to a workplace Commission, with no jurisdiction willing to take control of the situation.[257] DND spoke of its ongoing initiative to design an integrated process that would merge processes dealing with harassment, grievances and alternative dispute resolutions, with the goal of offering members a single point of entry with one contact person. The individual responsible for the process would direct the complainant to the most appropriate mechanisms, starting, when possible, with alternative dispute resolution as the preferred option.[258] Witnesses also suggested that multiple reporting channels can lead to confusion, overlap of functions, and inefficiencies because of duplication.[259] As a result of this confusion, complainants of sexual harassment are less likely to report it if they do not have access, in a confidential manner, to a source of well-defined and impartial information on the options for reporting, the processes, the legal remedies, and the possible challenges.[260] One witness from the RCMP External Review Committee stated that its employees need consistency in how complaints are managed across all regions of the country.[261] The Committee heard that in workplaces, a dedicated person should be established as a point of contact and have the role of champion in informing people about anti-harassment policies and reporting procedures.[262] Ann Therese MacEachern, Vice-President of Human Resources at Canada Post, said that they had human rights coordinators who were responsible for “looking into the complaint, investigating the complaint, and dealing with it,” and that employees could use an established whistleblowers line if they did not feel comfortable contacting the human rights coordinator directly.[263] Recommendation 3 The Committee recommends that departments and deputy ministers highlight the presence of a designated harassment advisor or investigator through internal education campaigns and consider flexible options for contacting the designated harassment advisor or investigator, such as a confidential 1-800 number. In addition, the Committee heard that employees are less likely to report if they do not have confidence in the reporting process,[264] and this confidence is diminished by:
2. The Complaint-Driven ApproachThe Committee heard that the complaint-driven process is flawed because it puts the onus to report on the victims of harassment, who may be embarrassed, fearful, intimidated or isolated.[268] A representative from the PSAC said that processes in workplaces should be awareness-driven, not complaint-driven, whereby those who are aware of harassment — employees or managers — are obligated to act.[269] As discussed in an earlier section of this report, the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations[270] under the Canada Labour Code[271] address workplace violence and make explicit the obligations of employers and employees in preventing and addressing such violence.[272] The Committee heard that the benefit of this approach is that it is not complaint-driven and does not give the authority to a manager to determine how to proceed.[273] While the regulations do not include a specific reference to sexual harassment, the definition provided in the Code does include psychological violence. Officials responsible for the administration of the Code confirmed that “it can also be applied to sexual harassment.”[274] According to a witness from the Treasury Board Secretariat, the TBS policy for public servants does not allow employees who witness harassment to lodge a complaint; the subject of the harassment must be the individual to submit a report.[275] This difference between the Canada Labour Code and the TBS policy was highlighted by witnesses, and a union representative suggested that the preferred course of action is to use the Canada Labour Code approach.[276] The Committee also heard that the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner does not depend on a complaint-driven process in its investigations. The Commissioner can choose to self-initiate an investigation based on information the Office receives from a variety of areas, including the media or the general public.[277] Another approach that does not rely on a complaint-driven process is a confidential reporting option, which allows individuals who are not being harassed to file a report. For example, the “E” Division of the RCMP has developed an electronic confidential reporting option outside the chain of command.[278] 3. Reporting “Not Worth It”The Committee was told that many individuals do not report sexual harassment because, from their point of view, it is “not worth it” or would “not make a difference.”[279] For many individuals, reporting comes down to a cost-benefit analysis.[280] Witnesses explained that an individual’s perception that sexual harassment is not worth reporting can be affected by known cases within the workplace where:
4. Workplace CultureThe Committee was told that in some workplaces, sexual harassment remains under-reported because it is normalized or trivialized within the workplace’s culture.[284] Employers, managers and co-workers must be prepared to challenge social norms that govern workplace behaviours, and which can discount the seriousness of or reinforce sexually harassing conduct.[285] Another witness indicated that employers who enforce desired behavioural norms can change normative standards of behaviour, which leads to an overall workplace culture shift.[286] The Committee was told that in some workplaces, victims of sexual harassment will not report the situation for fear that they will not be believed by management or co-workers.[287] Many victims will be concerned about the effect that reporting will have on their reputation, including being labelled as a “troublemaker”, losing the trust of co‑workers, or being subjected to value judgements.[288] The Committee heard that workplaces should promote a culture change so that complaining about wrongdoings, particularly sexual harassment, is viewed positively.[289] While employers should strive to eliminate sexual harassment, they must be “practical and realistic”,[290] and understand that in workplaces with diverse individuals, harassment will occur occasionally.[291] As stated by one witness, “quite frankly, a small number of people … are just never going to get it.”[292] Dr. Welsh, of the University of Toronto, said that employers and management should understand that the reporting and filing of complaints is not necessarily a sign of a workplace with problems: I often hear managers say one complaint is too many, at the same time one complaint means someone believes she can complain and that her complaint will be taken seriously. So complaints are not the best measure of whether or not a workplace has a harassment problem. Rather complaints may mean an organization has a culture and policies and procedures that are doing what we want them to do, enabling workers to come forward when something problematic happens.[293] In addition, the Committee heard that it is particularly challenging for women to report sexual harassment in male-dominated workplaces,[294] where the “vulnerability of these small numbers of women” can also be “heightened by the socially gendered and geographic isolation of their employment.”[295] In addition, reporting is more difficult for women when the majority of managers and investigators are male, meaning that a male perspective dominates.[296] 5. RetaliationThe Committee heard that employees should expect to work without fear of reprisal, whether their allegations are founded or not.[297] However, the Committee was told that many victims experience retaliation from an individual as an accepted practice of workplace culture.[298] A number of witnesses remarked that the reprisal for reporting sexual harassment was sometimes worse than tolerating the behaviour.[299] Witnesses provided some examples of retribution faced by those who report sexual harassment, including:
Witnesses spoke of the critical role that the law,[306] internal policies,[307] and leadership[308] should have in stopping reprisals against victims of harassment. Witnesses also discussed the significance of confidentiality in the initial reporting process to reduce the fear of reprisal.[309] The Deputy Chief of the Toronto Police Service stated that it created an anonymous whistle-blower telephone line, which allows a member to anonymously report the misconduct of another employee.[310] The Committee heard that reprisal against women who report sexual harassment has been ongoing for decades. As an example, one witness spoke of a case in the 1980s, where an employee, after reporting harassment, faced a $30,000 lawsuit for slander, hostility from co-workers, suspension without pay, and had to undergo a lie detector test and a psychiatric assessment.[311] The Committee heard testimony from a former officer of the RCMP who asserted that she experienced serious reprisal after asking her supervisor and fellow officers to stop harassing her. She explained that the reprisals began with name-calling which escalated to other incidents such as finding her personal locker stuffed with a dead and bloody prairie chicken or having the women’s bathroom stall door unscrewed so that it fell on her head.[312] The former RCMP employee said that she became a target, as though she were marked with a “black X”.[313] 6. A Lack of Support for ComplainantsThe Committee was told that most individuals need a personal support network, including family, friends and community, to bring forward a complaint of sexual harassment.[314] One witness stated that she would advise against initiating a complaint procedure if the victim of sexual harassment does not have such a support network in place.[315] Witnesses indicated that employees in isolated and remote areas face a greater challenge in reporting sexual harassment as they do not have access to the usual support network of family, friends, co-workers and management.[316] The Committee heard that while an employer can have little influence over the personal support available,[317] a workplace should establish other forms of support.[318] Witnesses provided examples of various arrangements aimed at providing additional support to victims within the workplace:
The Committee was told that financial support is also important, as a key deterrent to reporting is that formal sexual harassment processes often require extensive legal resources and can be financially draining.[322] In addition, the Committee was informed that some women’s reluctance to report sexual harassment was affected by their citizenship status, particularly if there is a language barrier and they do not have the necessary translation support.[323] The Committee heard from Ms. MacQuarrie of Western University about the need for organizations that support victims: You can go to a generic counselling agency, and they may or may not have any particular understanding of the dynamics of workplace harassment, workplace sexual harassment, or gendered harassment…. We have a real need for a network of community supports that have people in place who really understand harassment and are able to offer appropriate support, appropriate advice sometimes, for moving forward with a complaint.[324] 7. LeadershipWitnesses said that leaders who fail to address, ignore, or condone harassing behaviour, or engage in harassment themselves, contribute to a workplace environment prone to sexual harassment and under-reporting.[325] The Committee heard that having women in leadership roles increased reporting of sexual harassment by women for a number of reasons:
One witness recommended that there should always be the option of reporting harassment to a woman.[329] Another witness stated that the federal government should place a “renewed emphasis … on hiring and promoting minorities, of which women are one,” with the goal of promoting a workplace reflective of a society that does not accept harassment.[330] The subject of women in leadership positions is expanded on in the section “Key Factors in Reducing Sexual Harassment”. 8. Job InsecuritySome witnesses spoke of job insecurity as a contributing factor to the incidences of sexual harassment and its under-reporting,[331] while others disagreed with that connection.[332] The Committee heard that job insecurity can foster a work environment of anxiety, competition and inequalities leading to inappropriate behaviour,[333] or that extra pressure from job insecurity can make reporting of ongoing situations of sexual harassment more difficult.[334] One witness stated that certain workers whose jobs may be at risk are at greater risk of sexual harassment and of not reporting harassment, and these individuals include “workers in temporary positions, workers on probation or in some kind of trial period for a position, and also young workers who are new to the workplace.”[335] Dr. Welsh stated that there could be fewer cases of harassment in workplaces when “interpersonal competition and job insecurity are reduced or at least recognized by management.”[336] [155] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1135 (Dr. Kim Stanton, Legal Director, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1200 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [156] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress). [157] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1140 (Ms. Lisa-Marie Inman, Director, Reviews and Investigations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission). [158] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1155 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission). [159] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1150 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [160] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1140 (Ms. Lisa-Marie Inman, Director, Reviews and Investigations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission). [161] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission). [162] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [163] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1205 (Commissioner Bob Paulson, Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1205 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0930 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress). [164] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0850 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1140 (Dr. Kim Stanton, Legal Director, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [165] FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0915 (Mr. Serge Jetté, Manager, Conflict, Management Services, Human Resources Division, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0935 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1255 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [166] FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1110 (Ms. Mary Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner). [167] Ibid. [168] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [169] FEWO, Evidence, 22 April 2013, 1810 (Professor Paula McDonald, Business School, Queensland University of Technology, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1135 (Dr. Kim Stanton, Legal Director, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1040 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne). [170] FEWO, Evidence, 22 April 2013, 1820 (Professor Paula McDonald, Business School, Queensland University of Technology, appearing as an individual). [171] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0915 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1210 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1115 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [172] Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Public Service Employee Survey. [173] Statistics Canada, Public Service Employee Survey. [174] FEWO, Evidence, 1 November 2012, 0855 (Mr. Geoff Bowlby, Director, Special Surveys, Statistics Canada). [175] Ibid., 0850. [176] Ibid., 0855. [177] FEWO, Evidence, 1 November 2012, 0905 (Mr. Geoff Bowlby, Director, Special Surveys, Statistics Canada); Public Service Alliance of Canada, “Supplementary Note on Treasury Board’s Harassment Policy,” submitted to FEWO, 15 February 2013; FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1155 (Ms. Andrée Côté, Women’s and Human Rights Officer, National Programs Section, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [178] Public Service Alliance of Canada, “Brief to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women (FEWO) on Sexual Harassment in the Federal Public Service,” submitted to FEWO, 29 January 2013, p. 13; FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1145 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [179] Public Service Alliance of Canada, “Supplementary Note on Treasury Board’s Harassment Policy,” submitted to FEWO, 15 February 2013, pp. 2–3. [180] FEWO, Evidence, 1 November 2012, 0905 (Mr. Geoff Bowlby, Director, Special Surveys, Statistics Canada). [181] Ibid. [182] FEWO, Evidence, 25 October 2012, 0855 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat). [183] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0910 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 1 November 2012, 0855 (Mr. Geoff Bowlby, Director, Special Surveys, Statistics Canada). [184] Information about the PSES is taken from the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, “2011 Public Service Employee Survey” and links contained on that page. [185] Ibid. [186] FEWO, Evidence, 5 March 2013, 1140 (Mrs. Monique Marcotte, Interim Executive Director, English Services Human Resources; Executive Director, Strategic Planning and Human Resources Corporate Groups, People and Culture, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). [187] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0920 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat). [188] Ibid. [189] Ibid. [190] Ibid., 0940. [191] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1200 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress). [192] Statistics Canada, Violence Against Women Survey (VAWS), #3896, 1993. [193] Ibid. [194] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission). [195] Sara Johnson, “Work-related sexual harassment,” Perspectives on Labour and Income, Statistics Canada, Vol. 6, No. 4, Winter 1994. [196] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1200 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [197] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission). [198] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1200 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [199] Ibid., 1230. [200] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress). [201] Although the name of the department has been recently changed, references in this report use the former name, to reflect titles at the time of the hearings. [202] FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0915 (Mrs. Caroline Cyr, Director General, Workplace Directorate, Labour Program, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development). [203] Ibid., 0915. [204] Ibid. [205] Statistics Canada, Federal Jurisdiction Workplace Survey. [206] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission). [207] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0955 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [208] Status of Women Canada, Who We Are. [209] Ibid. [210] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1230 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [211] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual) FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1230 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [212] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1230 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [213] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [214] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1230 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [215] FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 0925 (Mrs. Kathryn Butler Malette, Chief, Human Resources Officer, Human Resources, Corporate Planning and Communications, House of Commons); Canadian Auto Workers, “Responses to Questions,” 18 March 2013; FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1115 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1225 (Mr. Vinay Sharma, Director of Human Rights, Canadian Auto Workers). [216] FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 0925 (Mrs. Kathryn Butler Malette, Chief, Human Resources Officer, Human Resources, Corporate Planning and Communications, House of Commons). [217] FEWO, Evidence, 5 March 2013, 1110 (Mrs. Monique Marcotte, Interim Executive Director, English Services Human Resources; Executive Director, Strategic Planning and Human Resources Corporate Groups, People and Culture, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). [218] Canadian Auto Workers, “Responses to Questions,” 18 March 2013. [219] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1115 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission). [220] Ibid., 1155. [221] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1250 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [222] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1250 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1120 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [223] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1145 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [224] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0910 (Ms. Jacqueline Rigg, Director General, Civilian Human Resources Management Operations, Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian), Department of National Defence); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0920 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman). [225] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0910 (Commander Tony Crewe, Director Human Rights and Diversity, Assistant Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [226] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0845 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [227] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0910 (Ms. Jacqueline Rigg, Director General, Civilian Human Resources Management Operations, Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian), Department of National Defence); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0920 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman). [228] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1140 (Ms. Lisa-Marie Inman, Director, Reviews and Investigations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission). [229] FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1130 (Ms. Amanda Maltby, General Manager, Compliance, Canada Post). [230] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0900 (Ms. Jacqueline Rigg, Director General, Civilian Human Resources Management Operations, Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian), Department of National Defence). [231] Ibid. [232] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0920 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence); FEWO, Evidence, 12 February 2013, 1135 (PO 1 Shanna Wilson, National Military Co-Chair, Defence Women’s Advisory Organization); FEWO, Evidence, 20 November 2012, 0945 (Ms. Catherine Ebbs, Chair, Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee). [233] FEWO, Evidence, 12 February 2013, 1135 (PO 1 Shanna Wilson, National Military Co-Chair, Defence Women’s Advisory Organization); FEWO, Evidence, 20 November 2012, 1000 (Ms. Catherine Ebbs, Chair, Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee). [234] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0920 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [235] Ibid. [236] FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 0905 (Ms. Sonia L’Heureux, Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament). [237] FEWO, Evidence, 12 February 2013, 1135 (PO 1 Shanna Wilson, National Military Co-Chair, Defence Women’s Advisory Organization). [238] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 1030 (Mr. Susheel Gupta, Acting Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal). [239] FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1235 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police). [240] FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1130 (Ms. Amanda Maltby, General Manager, Compliance, Canada Post). [241] Ibid., 1120. [242] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1120 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1205 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [243] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1225 (Ms. Paula Turtle, Canadian Counsel, United Steelworkers); FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1105 (Ms. Francine Boudreau, Correctional Officer, Union of Canadian Correctional Officers). [244] FEWO, Evidence, 25 October 2012, 0900 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat). [245] Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, 2011 Public Service Employee Survey Demographic Results for the Public Service of Canada by Gender. [246] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1005 (Mr. Steven Gaon, appearing as an individual). [247] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. David Langtry, Acting Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner’s Office, Canadian Human Rights Commission). [248] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0915 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1155 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [249] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [250] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0850 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1140 (Dr. Kim Stanton, Legal Director, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [251] FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0915 (Mr. Serge Jetté, Manager, Conflict, Management Services, Human Resources Division, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0935 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1255 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [252] FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1110 (Ms. Mary Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner). [253] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [254] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [255] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1255 (Professor Linda Collinsworth, Associate Professor of Psychology, Millikin University, appearing as an individual). [256] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0950 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [257] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [258] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0910 (Commander Tony Crewe, Director Human Rights and Diversity, Assistant Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [259] FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0950 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [260] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1225 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0915 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1210 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1115 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [261] FEWO, Evidence, 20 November 2012, 0945 (Ms. Catherine Ebbs, Chair, Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee). [262] FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0915 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0900 (Mr. Serge Jetté, Manager, Conflict, Management Services, Human Resources Division, Treasury Board Secretariat). [263] FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1115 (Ms. Ann Therese MacEachern, Vice-President, Human Resources, Canada Post). [264] FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1205 (Mr. Robin Kers, Labour Relations Officer, National Office, Union of Solicitor General Employees). [265] FEWO, Evidence, 28 February 2013, 1120 (Deputy Commissioner Craig J. Callens, Commanding Officer, “E” Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1220 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [266] FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1120 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1105 (Ms. Mary Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner). [267] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1035 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 26 February 2013, 1115 (Mr. Ian McPhail, Interim Chair, Chair’s Office, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Public Complaints Commission); FEWO, Evidence, 22 April 2013, 1800 (Professor Paula McDonald, Business School, Queensland University of Technology, appearing as an individual). [268] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1130 (Mr. Bob Kingston, National President, Agriculture Union, Co-Chair, Public Service Wide Policy Committee on Health and Safety, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1205 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [269] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1125 (Mr. Bob Kingston, National President, Agriculture Union, Co-Chair, Public Service Wide Policy Committee on Health and Safety, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [270] “Violence Prevention in the Workplace,” Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, Part XX. [271] Canada Labour Code, s. 125(1)(z.16). [272] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1130 (Mr. Bob Kingston, National President, Agriculture Union, Co-Chair, Public Service Wide Policy Committee on Health and Safety, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [273] Ibid. [274] FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0850 (Mrs. Caroline Cyr, Director General, Workplace Directorate, Labour Program, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development). [275] FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0920 (Mr. Serge Jetté, Manager, Conflict, Management Services, Human Resources Division, Treasury Board Secretariat). [276] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1130 (Mr. Bob Kingston, National President, Agriculture Union, Co-Chair, Public Service Wide Policy Committee on Health and Safety, Public Service Alliance of Canada). [277] FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1135 (Ms. Mary Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner). [278] FEWO, Evidence, 28 February 2013, 1120 (Deputy Commissioner Craig J. Callens, Commanding Officer, “E” Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police). [279] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0930 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [280] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0910 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne). [281] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0905 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1210 (Professor Linda Collinsworth, Associate Professor of Psychology, Millikin University, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1205 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [282] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1035 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1145 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0905 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1135 (Dr. Kim Stanton, Legal Director, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [283] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress). [284] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1105 (Ms. Francine Boudreau, Correctional Officer, Union of Canadian Correctional Officers); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0930 (Mr. Timothy Edwards, President, Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1105 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1220 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [285] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1150 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [286] FEWO, Evidence, 22 November 2012, 0845 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence). [287] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1200 (Ms. Robyn Benson, National President, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1135 (Ms. Janet Hauck, National Vice-President, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [288] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1115 (Ms. Francine Boudreau, Correctional Officer, Union of Canadian Correctional Officers); FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1120 (Ms. Cindy Viau, Director’s Advisor, The Quebec Help and Information Centre on Harassment in the Workplace); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0910 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); “Partial transcription of testimony given at a public meeting on 22 April 2013,” Transcript distributed to FEWO (Ms. Krista Carle), p. 17. [289] FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1035 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [290] FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1210 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police). [291] FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1210 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police); FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0855 (Ms. Linda Savoie, Director General, Women’s Program and Regional Operations Directorate, Status of Women Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1100 (Ms. Ann Therese MacEachern, Vice-President, Human Resources, Canada Post); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1040 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne). [292] FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 1040 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne). [293] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [294] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1135 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1145 (Ms. Cindy Viau, Director’s Advisor, The Quebec Help and Information Centre on Harassment in the Workplace). [295] FEWO, Evidence, 12 February 2013, 1120 (LCol Karen Davis, Defence Scientist, Director General Military Personnel Research and Analysis, Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, appearing as an individual). [296] FEWO, Evidence, 12 February 2013, 1120 (LCol Karen Davis, Defence Scientist, Director General Military Personnel Research and Analysis, Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1205 (Mr. Robin Kers, Labour Relations Officer, National Office, Union of Solicitor General Employees). [297] FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 0905 (Ms. Sonia L’Heureux, Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament). [298] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0855 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); “Partial transcription of testimony given at a public meeting on 22 April 2013,” Transcript distributed to FEWO (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk), p. 2 and (Ms. Krista Carle), p. 16. [299] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0905 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1220 (Mr. Robin Kers, Labour Relations Officer, National Office, Union of Solicitor General Employees); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1140 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [300] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 1025 (Mr. Karol Wenek, Director General Military Personnel, Chief Military Personnel, Department of National Defence); FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1235 (Deputy Chief Michael Federico, Deputy Chief, Toronto Police Service); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1115 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [301] FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0910 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1235 (Deputy Chief Michael Federico, Deputy Chief, Toronto Police Service). [302] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 7 March 2013, 1110 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0855 (Mr. Timothy Edwards, President, Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers). [303] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0855 (Mr. Timothy Edwards, President, Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers). [304] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 4 December 2012, 0935 (Colonel Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1110 (Ms. Mary Dawson, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1145 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [305] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1135 (Mr. Robin Kers, National Representative, Union of Solicitor General Employees, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [306] FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1235 (Deputy Chief Michael Federico, Deputy Chief, Toronto Police Service). [307] FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1210 (Deputy Chief Michael Federico, Deputy Chief, Toronto Police Service); FEWO, Evidence, 29 November 2012, 0935 (Mr. Serge Jetté, Manager, Conflict, Management Services, Human Resources Division, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1125 (Ms. Josée Bouchard, Equity Advisor, Equity Initiatives Department, Law Society of Upper Canada). [308] FEWO, Evidence, 18 April 2013, 1220 (Commissioner Chris D. Lewis, Commissioner, Field Operations, Ontario Provincial Police); FEWO, Evidence, 28 February 2013, 1150 (Deputy Commissioner Craig J. Callens, Commanding Officer, “E” Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police). [309] FEWO, Evidence, 28 February 2013, 1135 (Deputy Commissioner Craig J. Callens, Commanding Officer, “E” Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police); FEWO, Evidence, 28 February 2013, 1150 (Inspector Carol Bradley, Team Leader, “E” Division, Respectful Workplace Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police). [310] FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1210 (Deputy Chief Michael Federico, Deputy Chief, Toronto Police Service). [311] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [312] FEWO, Evidence, 7 March 2013, 1110 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [313] “Partial transcription of testimony given at a public meeting on 22 April 2013,” Transcript distributed to FEWO (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk), p. 2. [314] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1215 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1120 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [315] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1215 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [316] FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1155 (Ms. Amanda Maltby, General Manager, Compliance, Canada Post); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0855 (Mr. Timothy Edwards, President, Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers). [317] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1215 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [318] FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1120 (Ms. Sherry Lee Benson-Podolchuk, appearing as an individual). [319] FEWO, Evidence, 26 March 2013, 1100 (Ms. Cindy Viau, Director’s Advisor, The Quebec Help and Information Centre on Harassment in the Workplace). [320] FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1210 (Mr. Vinay Sharma, Director of Human Rights, Canadian Auto Workers). [321] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 23 May 2013, 1235 (Professor Linda Collinsworth, Associate Professor of Psychology, Millikin University, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 16 October 2012, 0910 (Mr. Ross MacLeod, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance Planning and Policy Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat); FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1105 (Ms. Amanda Maltby, General Manager, Compliance, Canada Post); FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1110 (Ms. Anne-Marie Beauchemin, Correctional Officer, Union of Canadian Correctional Officers). [322] See for example: FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1145 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1205 (Mr. Robin Kers, Labour Relations Officer, National Office, Union of Solicitor General Employees); FEWO, Evidence, 23 October 2012, 0955 (Mr. Christopher Rootham, Partner and Director of Research, Labour Law and Employment Law Groups, Nelligan O’Brien Payne). [323] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1140 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1210 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [324] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1215 (Ms. Barbara MacQuarrie, Community Director, Faculty of Education, Western University, Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children). [325] FEWO, Evidence, 29 January 2013, 1130 (Mr. Bob Kingston, National President, Agriculture Union, Co-Chair, Public Service Wide Policy Committee on Health and Safety, Public Service Alliance of Canada); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1200 (Dr. Jennifer Berdahl, Professor, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual); FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1110 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [326] FEWO, Evidence, 27 November 2012, 0915 (Ms. Audrey O’Brien, Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons). [327] FEWO, Evidence, 14 February 2013, 1205 (Mr. Robin Kers, Labour Relations Officer, National Office, Union of Solicitor General Employees). [328] FEWO, Evidence, 5 March 2013, 1130 (Mr. Hubert T. Lacroix, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). [329] FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1240 (Dr. Lynn Bowes-Sperry, Association Professor of Management, College of Business, Western New England University, appearing as an individual). [330] FEWO, Evidence, 28 May 2013, 1120 (Ms. Ainslie Benedict, Partner, Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP, Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund). [331] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0850 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1205 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [332] FEWO, Evidence, 31 January 2013, 1135 (Ms. Ann Therese MacEachern, Vice-President, Human Resources, Canada Post). [333] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0910 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1205 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [334] FEWO, Evidence, 6 December 2012, 0910 (Ms. Vicky Smallman, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1230 (Ms. Paula Turtle, Canadian Counsel, United Steelworkers); FEWO, Evidence, 7 February 2013, 1230 (Mr. Vinay Sharma, Director of Human Rights, Canadian Auto Workers). [335] FEWO, Evidence, 16 April 2013, 1205 (Dr. Sandy Welsh, Professor of Sociology, Vice-Dean, Graduate Education and Program Reviews, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, appearing as an individual). [336] Ibid., 1210. |