Harassment Complaints and officers searching for gold…

Posted on by Pete Cross

It would be easy to speak to the nonsense that continues in Surrey and the shenanigans of Mayor Locke, or the fact that our Prime Minister has revealed himself to be a “Swiftie”, and is apparently devastated by the fact that Taylor isn’t scheduled to appear in Canada this year– but those topics are too easy. They are the types of subjects that are repeatedly proving themselves too easy to poke fun at and there is no challenge in it. And It’s summer, so one’s thoughts should be filled with images of sand, sun and warm rays. Nevertheless the ridiculousness continues to keep washing over us, as much as we try to not watch the news or listen, we are being inundated by the blarney.

So lets talk about sexual harassment and harassment complaints in the RCMP. Nothing like a good debate on sexual harassment to kill the beach boys vibe. It is a serious issue to be sure, but one which the RCMP, or more specifically the Liberal government has managed to turn into another three ring victim compassion circle. As is often the case, my interest and then my incredulity, was spiked by a recent CBC article. By the way, should you ever wish to get riled up, the CBC is usually the best place to start, as they are continually searching the world over, for the next victim, the next devastated community, the next world crisis which is forcing us to the brink of extinction. In terms of the story in question, one has to suspect that when they ran this sexual harassment story, they were clearly having a slow day, or were maybe more concerned with the current campaign by the Liberals to try and get Facebook to pay them for putting their television news clippings on their website.

The CBC story begins with the usual flabbergasted proclamation in the headline, that the Independent Centre for Harassment Resolution is, god help us all, backlogged. Justice is not being done, justice is on hold, victims, and their lawyers are forced to wait long lines, bureaucratic stalemates are everywhere. The CBC voiced their outrage, and then they needed to go find a couple of prattling victims to outline and demonstrate these nefarious examples of injustice.

First, one needs to remember that the RCMP has already paid out $125 million to 2,304 female officers who made claims of being sexually harassed or abused over the last thirty or so years; this averages out to $54,253.47 paid out per complainant. That was in 2016. Then, a few years later they then paid out another $100 million to female employees who were in “non-policing roles” with the RCMP. But that was clearly not enough for the liberal gods of outrage.

On June 30th, 2021 the government and the RCMP then created the Independent Centre for Harassment Resolution. This was another bureaucratic group that was going to act as an “investigative” body to deal with the apparent and rampant ongoing harassment that was taking place daily in the misogynistic RCMP. They have proven to be too popular. Since opening their doors, they say they are now dealing with “hundreds of sexual assault and harassment complaints”. This has led to “long delays”, and now having to apologize due to the fact that in their initial mandate they were claiming that the time line for any complaint was going to be a maximum of 12 months.

In their current reporting the ICHR says that in the two years of their existence, they have now received 940 notices/complaints– 165 in this year alone. They have completed 325 investigations to date, and at least 71 are still awaiting the assignment of an “investigator”. Of course because of this deluge of discontent, they are now not able to stick to their 12 month timeline.

These numbers seem high. Is it possible that this has become another place where the ever sniffing Mounties have picked up the scent of gold. Has this become another Veterans Disability pot of shiny substance, where certain members, who are willing to abuse the system, are now also lurking in great numbers? I realize some people may take offence at this proclamation, that this will be seen as a damning indictment which aims at the honesty and credibility of the officers involved. I will apologize in advance, to those with legitimate claims. However there is a great deal of anecdotal evidence, a great deal of smoke, of this simply being the latest pot at the end of the rainbow. This has excited the less than scrupulous officers, who we all know are out there.

Of course, we are not allowed to look in, all of the files are guarded by Privacy “concerns”, so we will never know the true extent of fraudulent claims, unless someone on the inside speaks out. But, no worries, the CBC is an expert in seeking out the victims and have enticed some to come forward to at the very least, provide the nature of their complaint.

The example provided by the CBC concerns the case of officer Nicole Patapoff, who speaks through her lawyer, Sherry Shir. Ms. Patapoff is an eight year member, who was just coming off maternity leave, so has probably six or seven years active service, and she was thus required to attend firearms qualifications at her local range to “re-qualify”. Ms. Patapoff was having troubles on the firing range, with the strength in her “trigger finger”. Now, for those that don’t know, this is a common problem, as it requires some strength to pull the trigger and hold it while maintaining breathing and control. Every time I was at the range doing the same thing, there was inevitably someone who was having problems with their trigger finger not being strong enough, or they had small hands, which made it more difficult for consistent trigger pull. Often the instructor will encourage the person to actually do finger exercises, in their off-time, to try and get it right.

The offence according to Ms. Patapoff, was that the instructor told her to go home, clean the bathroom with windex or something similar to help strengthen that trigger finger. One could only assume that he meant that by using the spray device would help build up strength, but of course that is not how Ms. Patapoff took it. She was angered, and said that the statement was “misogynistic, belittling, offensive, disrespectful, and demeaning”.

An 18 month harassment investigation ensued.

The eventual but short lived good news is that her complaint was dismissed, as not meeting the criteria under the Canada Labour Code.

Had sanity finally prevailed?

But wait, as you guessed, the madness of it all continues. There is no administrative appeal process. So, lawyer Sherry Shir took the case to Federal court and argued that the complaint was “dismissed improperly”, and launched an appeal on behalf of Ms. Patapoff.

Court documents now reveal that the original investigator has now been removed from the approved list of ICHR investigators; and earlier this month the RCMP have now agreed to assign another investigator to this case. Would anyone like to guess what the new outcome will be?

They are also complaining that it is all taking too long. Amanda Nemer the Executive Director of the ICHR blames the delays on the “lack of market availability for external investigators”. One would think that you would only have to go to LinkedIn because they seem to have lists of people who advertise themselves as “investigators”. But, I will accept her explanation, as who in their right mind would want to head up this massive investigation. One must also keep in mind it took the first investigator 18 months for an investigation that would boil down to two questions. Did you say it? Is this contrary to the Canadian Labour Code?

Marco Mendocino, the Minister responsible, and quickly trying to overtake Bill Blair as the most incompetent Minister in the Liberal government, is heartened by “the rise in complaints”, that it is a “positive sign as it demonstrates the confidence that the RCMP members and employees have in this system”. So one could assume if every singe person in the RCMP made a complaint, Mr. Mendocino would interpret this to mean that everything was good because they had faith in the process.

The second case, albeit briefly mentioned by the CBC is the one involving RCMP officer Todd Gray. You will remember him; he is the member complaining of harassment, and one of his complaints is that he had to ride in the horse trailer while assigned and on the Musical ride. (by the way, I am told that that was a common practise when the Ride was travelling with the horses).

If these two examples are the best cases for the argument against sexual harassment and bullying, then the RCMP and this government is in some serious trouble in terms of their credibility.

The problem with all of this seems to be that the Mounties are just one group, that has come to the realization that when it comes to suing the Federal government, there are certain cases you will always win– regardless of the evidence or lack of evidence. Any suit you can bring that deals with harassment, sexual harassment, disabilities, or indigenous rights will in effect be settled– the government and the RCMP will never go to court. When anyone brings forward a case that can involve these topics, it seems to chum the waters for the circling lawyer sharks. The lawyers and their clients know that virtually all of these types of cases end with the conversation “What will it cost to make this go away?” It is now well established that the Liberal government will never be forced into a headline where they are appearing to be insensitive to these issues. Money is no object, when one needs to be seen and are being directed so as to be on the right side of good.

Unfortunately, there are certain officers who can convince themselves that any infraction or misstatement should result in compensation. I know of many cases of officers abusing the Veterans Affairs disability system, and I know many cases of officers benefitting from the sexual harassment settlements where the evidence was dubious or weak at best. It’s all anecdotal, although many officers can’t help themselves and brag about their winnings, because no one is allowed to know, and therein lies the beauty of the fraud. There is no punishment or redress for making a vexatious complaint, you simply give it a try and see if it works.

So, I am sorry Ms. Patapoff, your complaint from the outside looking in, appears ridiculous, you are wasting the resources of government. But, I also suspect that in a year or two, if you hang in there, you will get a settlement and that it will be paid out, just to have you go away. It may not amount to much in the end, once your lawyer takes their 30% however. And if you continue your policing career, prepare to get much more offended by what people say to you– it will be more offensive than someone telling you to squeeze a Windex applicator.

Photo courtesy of Paul Scott Via Flickr Commons — Some Rights Reserved

We are all suing the Mounties…apparently…

Posted on by Pete Cross

On September 20th of this year, the Federal Court “certified” a class action lawsuit against the RCMP, and is asking for $1.1 billion. And you, whether you know it or not are a signatory– with no signature required.

We are with little doubt into a new age, in terms of lawsuits, everyone has a complaint and just as importantly everyone seems to feel the need for compensation. Hundreds of millions of dollars, in fact billions of dollars have been coming out of the Federal coffers; to pay off, or more accurately to “settle”, rather than facing a trial and protracted court cases. These settlements are often cloaked in secrecy, far from the prying eyes of the persons who are in actual fact paying out these monies. The end results or conclusions to these cases, are often just flashes in our mind’s eye, prompted by a headline or two, which makes us briefly flinch. Then we move on, our sanity and possible outrage papered over by our ignorance or our inability to dig deep.

What is somewhat surprising in this most recent lawsuit is the fact that every officer of the RCMP and reserve officer, since 1995 until the present, are automatically included in this particular lawsuit. The nexus of the claim, or your claim, is built around the central contention that we (present and former police officers) were subjected to “bullying” and “harassment”. Furthermore, the Mounties failed to provide a safe and respective “workplace”. One does have the option to “opt out” of being a participant, should you wish to fill out a provided form and send it in to the respective law firm before November 23, 2022.

So I and you (RCMP officers) am now being represented, without any effort, retainer, or affirmation by the firm of Kim Spencer McPhee Barristers PC. Since they are your new barristers it would seem pertinent to learn a little about them. It turns out that this firm is no stranger to the lawsuit game, in fact, their stated “focus” is “complex, high value class actions”. This Bay Street Toronto firm has been involved in many lawsuits and come up against such entities as ManuLife, General Motors, FedEx and Sunlife. RCMP members and ex-members have also been some of their favoured clients having been involved in the RCMP Gender Sexual Harassment and the RCMP Medical Examination suit.

The two principals of this law firm are Megan McPhee, a seemingly rising star in the field of class action suits in Canada and Michael C. Spencer, an American trained lawyer who brought his expertise in the field of securities and class actions from California and New York to Canada. This firm with regard to “our” lawsuit, has negotiated an agreement that will stand to net 1/3 of any awarded damages. That would be 33% of a possible $1.1 billion.

The firm have fronting this suit, two “representative plaintiffs”, Geoffrey Greenwood and Todd Gray, both RCMP members from Alberta. It was in 2019 that these two officers filed a suit alleging that they were the victims of “systemic negligence in the form of non-sexual bullying, intimidation, and general harassment”. The plaintiffs also argue that the RCMP chain of command that was “tasked to deal with internal recourse and harassment claims include those that are responsible for the harassment that is being complained about”. This they argue has led to a “toxic work environment” and is “characterized by abuses of power”.

There have been two other outside developments which seemed to have helped spur the lawsuit. One was the report by Chief Justice Michael Bastarache, “Broken Dreams, Broken Lives” which dealt with the sexual harassments claims of women in the RCMP. This report stated among many other things, that the RCMP can not fix itself “internally”. The lawsuit is also supported by a statement in 2016 when then Commissioner Paulson went on the record stating that the RCMP was guilty of “harassment and intimidation”.

The Federal government has by necessity tried to quash this latest suit, appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada. They argued that the internal systems already in place for grievances, was a sufficient remedy for these types of complaints and allegations. Without any written reason, in March 2022 the Supreme Court rejected that appeal.

If one attempts to amateurishly dissect and analyze the central core of these arguments one could probably come to some relatively easy conclusions. Albeit subjectively, there seems to be some strong arguments to be made in support of this civil case. It would be difficult to argue that even the basic training academy at the earliest point of a police officers career, centres on discipline and uses intimidation and harassment as the basic tools to force compliance and reinforce that “team” mentality. Depot has mellowed significantly since the 1970’s and 1980’s, but let’s face it, it is still there and was definitely there in 1995. Does anyone from the early era forget the Drill hall? There was a large caveat though, it was all intended as part of a game of survival. It was expected. You were challenged to ignore and face the often offensive behaviour, it was part of the indoctrination, it was part of the preparation for facing the abuse on the streets. So if this type of thing is accepted under todays standards as being harassment or intimidation the lawyers for the plaintiffs seem to be in a good position.

There is also little doubt that the RCMP has always investigated these types of complaints internally, and often it was the immediate supervisors who were tasked with this very unwanted task. If one accepts that this generally inhibits fairness and objectivity, and in fact corrupts, that too would be an easy argument that could be made by many.

Where the argument in favour of this lawsuit seems to fail is when one draws from the specific to the general. Staff Sargent Greenwood, one of the representative plaintiffs, and the most publicly outspoken is now the Staff in charge of GIS in North Red Deer, Alberta. His specifics are what constitutes some of the base for this lawsuit. He began his career in 1990 and was transferred to Yellowknife in 2003. He says that his troubles started in Yellowknife Detachment where he was ostracized for trying to “uncover corruption”. In 2007 he was promoted to Sgt. and had begun an investigation into some criminal organizations. During this investigation, which included wiretaps, there was some audio captured which implicated some RCMP officers allegedly taking “kickbacks” in amounts up to $60,000; destroying evidence, and leaking the locations of undercover operations and drug raids. Clearly very serious allegations. However the officers were not identified in the tapes, but later an “informant” for Greenwood managed to identify an involved officer.

In 2007 a new Superintendent took over the unit. This Supt. for reasons unknown at this time, told him to drop the case, which Greenwood refused to do, or at least that is the between the lines indication. This Supt. would end up filing no less than seven codes of conduct complaints against Greenwood. All but one would be eventually “dropped”. From this point, we can only rely on the public record, but suffice to say the two had some major differences. Greenwood said he was “demoted” to desk duty and filed a harassment complaint against the Supt. as well as another officer who “tried to punch him in the face”. Greenwood further states that he had suffered harassment and intimidation “throughout his career”, but that in all that happened in Yellowknife he “lost my way for numerous years”. He said that “most members struggle daily” and that he suffers from PTSD due to the “reprisals and harassment on the job”.

Todd Gray the other representative for this lawsuit, provides evidence that as a member of the Musical Ride and while performing at equestrian events was “forced to ride in a bunk in the same trailer as the horses” which was “unsafe, dangerous, and illegal”. He was also made to ride his horse “despite a back injury”. Furthermore he was “ostracized and isolated when he accused a detachment commander in Nunavut of mistreating First Nations people”. At first glance, Mr. Gray’s examples seem somewhat more fragile than that of Mr. Greenwood. Riding in the trailers with the horses was common practise according to my recollection, and part of the shared duties in the Musical Ride. It would also be difficult to believe that if presented a medical certificate of a back injury that any supervisor would have forced anyone to ride a horse. Possible for sure, but it seems unlikely. As to his accusations against the Nunavut detachment commander, also possible, but likely mentioned and underlined in the lawsuit to strike at the Federal government sensitivity to anything indigenous.

Not knowing all the details of this civil suit makes it difficult to sort the real from the unreal or the exaggerated. The complaints of the representative plaintiffs may be real and have proven devastating for these two individuals. But I will also admit to a bit of cynicism in terms of the complaints as they feel more “new age” than “old school”. The proof will be uncovered in the civil case should it in fact go to trial. Given the propensity of the Mounties to cover all wrong doing with greenbacks we may never know the truth in these matters. I personally did not feel that I was harassed or intimidated by my bosses over a thirty-four year career, but maybe I was just lucky. Nor do I believe that “most members struggle daily” as stated by Mr. Greenwood. However, I have often argued that a union was needed due to the various member problems that were given short shrift over the years, lost to an inefficient and bureaucratic system which often suffered from a lack of investigation as well as a lack of outcome.

So good luck to you my fellow participants in the Greenwood versus His Majesty the King. The worst result of “our” civil case may be all of us getting cheques for 40 bucks in a settlement with no real public explanation. You know as well as I that the lawyers are the only real winners.

Photo Courtesy of howtostartablogonline.net via Flickr Commons – Some Rights Reserved