Rumours poisoned work environment, employee says

An employee has won her case against the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC), alleging the public housing agency did not do its due diligence in ensuring the work environment was free from discrimination and harassment.

The grievor, parking officer Janice Gordon, filed two main complaints against the TCHC back in 2007. She claimed she was subjected to vicious rumours and gossip at the hands of her co-workers, who wrongfully suggested she was having an affair with her superiors, and that is why she was perceived to be receiving preferential treatment.

According to Gordon’s union, the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, the employer violated the collective agreement, particularly the non-discrimination and sexual harassment clauses, as well as the Human Rights Code and Occupational Health and Safety Act.

OPSEU argued TCHC failed to conduct a reasonably diligent investigation of the grievor’s allegations of a poisoned work environment.

As well, the union further alleged that the employer failed to act both promptly and reasonably to stop the harassment and discrimination.

"The grievor was the victim of a sustained and significant poisoned work environment created by the conduct of fellow employees who engaged in malicious gossip based on the grossest stereotypes of race and gender," OPSEU’s counsel argued during the hearing, adding, "Management had taken no effective steps to stop the intense, sustained campaign of rumours."

Both parties disagreed as to how much of an investigation was necessary.

While TCHC has in place a policy and mechanism to investigate allegations of harassment and discrimination, it said the rumours did not fall under that jurisdiction. However, evidence revealed management had followed up and interviewed the parties involved, but no definitive action was taken beyond those conversations.

The TCHC believed it was not liable for the actions of its other employees, the so-called gossip mongers, and management acted within reason.

"There was no suggestion or evidence that the employer failed to have policies and procedures in place, that it had failed to provide training, or had otherwise failed to establish the proper workplace foundation," TCHC explained. "The test was an objective test…Except in the face of particularly egregious standalone incidents, at law, there cannot be a finding of poisoned work environment in the absence of sufficient persistent and repeated incidents."

Arbitrator Marilyn Nairn disagreed. She sided with the union, saying Gordon was indeed subjected to harassment, and suffered further because the TCHC did not handle the situation according to the collective agreement.

"The workplace is heavily male-dominated and one where hierarchy and authority are valued. Where those attributes are valued, they may also be resented, particularly in a woman," Nairn said in her decision.

"The grievor presented as a strong, confident and assertive female within that environment. The workplace rumour contained the implicit, and in some cases explicit, message that the grievor was receiving preferred treatment at work from a supervisor in exchange for sexual favours. That, I find, was related to her gender."