Museum’s CEO said to have breached federal ethics codes: report

Canada’s federal integrity watchdog has concluded that Maria Chapman, CEO of the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 CEO, engaged in a years‑long pattern of inappropriate behaviour that violated both federal and institutional codes of conduct.

This caused emotional harm to staff, according to a case report by public sector integrity commissioner Harriet Solloway.

The report says Chapman’s conduct amounted to a “serious breach” of the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector and the museum’s own code under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

Offensive language by CEO

According to the report from the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada, Chapman repeatedly used offensive language, shouted at employees, instilled fear and singled out individuals and teams over more than a decade, creating what witnesses described as a culture of fear and a “toxic work environment.”

The watchdog notes that while individual incidents might not, on their own, meet the threshold for a serious breach, the cumulative and repeated nature of the conduct, and the number of employees affected, does.

The report concludes that Chapman’s behaviour represented “a significant departure from generally accepted practices within the federal public sector,” undermining the public‑sector values of “Respect for People,” “Integrity” and “Excellence” that are expected of senior leaders.

It further warns that the pattern of conduct “poses a serious threat to public confidence in the integrity of the public sector,” particularly because Chapman is a Governor in Council appointee and the museum’s most senior official.

Allegations of bullying, emotional harm

The investigation, led by the Commissioner’s office, included interviews with 20 people—among them Chapman and a substantial portion of the museum’s roughly 56‑person workforce—as well as reviews of internal documents and other records.

Witnesses told investigators that Chapman’s behaviour left some staff anxious about coming to work and reluctant to voice ideas and, in some cases.

The report notes that nine employees described experiencing fear and intimidation, with one saying they suffer panic attacks on workdays, keep their office door closed “to protect their mental health,” and feel their “stress and anxiety is through the roof.” Others reported exploring early retirement or other exit options, and some said the situation had contributed to thoughts of self‑harm.

In analyzing these accounts, the Commissioner concludes that some of Chapman’s conduct “may reasonably be characterized as” workplace bullying and describes her use of authority “to limit, punish and intimidate some employees” as particularly troubling in a public institution.

Offensive language, nicknames by CEO

A central feature of the findings concerns Chapman’s language in the workplace, especially how she referred to her senior leadership team. According to the report, Chapman called the group “sluts,” including in front of other staff and visitors. In one incident highlighted by the Commissioner, she told a foreign delegation, “I call them sluts,” then laughed.

While some witnesses suggested she was trying to be humorous, the watchdog concludes that such language is “inappropriate and inconsistent with the standards expected of someone in a leadership position in the federal public sector.”

The report also recounts testimony that Chapman ranked women at the museum by age, remarked that there were “no good‑looking men” at the institution and referred to some employees using pseudonyms tied to their perceived physical or behavioural traits, leading in some cases to “hurtful nicknames.”

Investigators further cite an incident in which Chapman rejected the idea of featuring a prominent female athlete in a museum product, saying the athlete “looks like a man” and making a face of disgust. The Commissioner calls it “offensive” to suggest that a woman is unfit to represent women based on appearance, and “even more problematic coming from a chief executive.”

Taken together, these remarks helped create an atmosphere in which employees felt they could be labelled at any time and worried about what that label might be, the report finds. The Commissioner writes that Chapman’s response to the allegations “reinforced her consistent approach to dismissing the impact of her words on the feelings of others.”

CEO disagrees with findings

Chapman strenuously disputes the findings, arguing in a written response appended to the report that it mischaracterizes the frequency, timing and context of many incidents. She asks that the report be amended “to correctly reflect the facts and to clarify the timing and frequency of incidents, some of which date as far back as 2004, when the museum was not within federal jurisdiction and was a Nova Scotia not‑for‑profit society.”

Chapman also takes issue with how the investigation characterizes interview participation. She says several interviewees were not employees and that “it is actually closer to fourteen current staff, which is only a quarter of the museum workforce.” She calls the phrasing “factually incorrect” and suggests it “seems as though the writer is attempting to advocate for a given result as opposed to fairly and neutrally presenting findings.”

She further criticized the fact that the only board representative interviewed by the federal investigator was the former vice‑chair, who was no longer on the board at the time. According to her, both the former chair and the current chair “expressed concerns about not being interviewed,” even though they were willing to participate, which “calls into question the fairness and thoroughness of the investigative process.”

On the issue of language, Chapman said in using the term “sluts,” she viewed herself as part of the group and the remark occurred in a context of solidarity.

Recommendation for wellness review

Despite Chapman’s objections, the Commissioner stood by the conclusions and issued one formal recommendation: that “an external expert assess the employees’ wellness at the museum to determine appropriate support measures,” in light of the harm described by staff.

Chapman said she “welcomes opportunities for learning and improvement” and looks forward to “engaging an external expert to guide us in the process.” She also promised to “commit to additional leadership training to enhance my self-awareness and to better understand how my actions and words may be perceived by others,” and said she remains “fully committed to leading our team forward with positivity and continuous improvement.”

However, the Commissioner concludes that Chapman “falls short of accepting [the recommendation] and committing to implement it” and that her attempts to justify the conduct “do not reflect the degree of accountability that is expected of her as the Chief Executive.”

On that basis, the report labels her response “not satisfactory” and says the office will request an update within six months to ensure the recommendation is “properly addressed.”