Evidence of meeting #89 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was policy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
Yes. It's a principle of natural justice that if you are in this process, you will all have the same information. It's very important for us so that everyone is able to comment on anything that's been said on the other side. It is very important if something comes up and you haven't seen it that you can comment on or add to it. Yes, it's very important for us.
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
Yes, the same process applies at the library. Our policy does dictate transparency. It does call for providing a copy of the draft to both parties for comments as well. There's always the need to balance the whole question of confidentiality with...but it is stated in our policy that both parties will receive a copy of the report.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Ms. Potter, you commented that you're already implementing policies in anticipation of Bill C-65. I would ask both the House of Commons and the Library of Parliament to comment on the following. You've discussed harassment. How do you define “harassment” now? The different degrees of harassment and how to interpret that has been a big issue before this committee. Should it be in the legislation? Should it be in regulation? Since you're now implementing policies and interpreting harassment, how do you define harassment?
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
We do have a definition of harassment in our policy.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
The last time was in 2016. Of course, with the implementation of Bill C-65, we will look at that again.
Go ahead, Michelle.
4:15 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
It does go with the whole spectrum, right? It does define that whole spectrum of inappropriate behaviour from one thing to another, and also the training.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
February 26th, 2018 / 4:15 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
Absolutely, yes.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
What about the House of Commons? You're adjudicating on harassment now, so how do you define it?
4:15 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
The three policies I mentioned earlier have different definitions. The one in the code of conduct that's been approved by the procedure and House affairs committee is fairly short, because it's sexual harassment only, and it's one sentence, whereas the—
4:15 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
From memory, it's conduct of a sexual nature that detrimentally affects the workplace. It's something to that effect. That's the one in the code of conduct. That applies to a member-to-member situation for sexual harassment only.
That's a very short definition, whereas in the policy that applies to you as members, as employers, there are three different sections. One is harassment—personal harassment or general harassment—another is abuse of authority, and the third one is sexual harassment. The three are pretty defined. I'm told that all parties have made this mandatory, so you'll see that these definitions will be defined for you, as will how to interpret these harassment definitions. We can table the same policy with the committee. They're fairly detailed and comply with best practices, so we're confident that they would stand any test.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you. I have a couple of questions.
We've been talking a lot at this committee about a “competent person” and how that person would be appointed under Bill C-65. Both of you have talked a bit about getting independent people to look into it. What do you think the best process is to find that competent person in a way that recognizes what is perhaps a power imbalance in a situation? Also, how do we ensure there is diversity among the competent people were seeking in applying with this legislation ?
4:15 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say “competent person”. Is that in the role of investigator or...?
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
It would be the person the dispute goes to after the employer and employee agree to a competent person.
4:15 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
A competent person to conduct the investigation...? From my perspective, what I do right now is that I have standing offers with multiple firms across Canada, because the investigations could take place anywhere. I base my evaluation of their competencies from having conducted multiple harassment investigations in the past. There's no certification for harassment investigations, but these firms are usually fairly well known and we go by reputation, and when we go by diversity—
Yes?
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Sorry, I'm just going to jump in on that piece, and then we can get to the diversity question. In your process, do both parties, employer and the employee or both parties to it, have to agree to that competent person, or is it your choice?
4:20 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
Right now under the policy that we have, it's my choice.
