In my brief I did give some specific examples of what you could use. I do agree that it should be broad. Manon spoke briefly about the performance management issues, and how some employees can perceive performance management as harassment. I do agree with her that it needs to be clear. At the same time, as someone already pointed out, some of those behaviours themselves, when they're done over and over, when they're done inappropriately, are in fact harassment. There's a fine line between those, which is why I think the definition needs to be brief.
I think including within the definition the idea that it can occur beyond organizational space and time boundaries is really important. We see a lot of online social media bullying that happens between employees. We see it happening on research sites, so it's often not within the organization, and it's not even necessarily about work. It could be between employees, if someone has a personal problem with another employee. It's not work-related, but it's still considered to be bullying. I definitely think it needs to be broad.
Including the term “ought reasonably be known to be unwelcome” or “to cause harm”, something like that, where the reasonable person test is included in the definition I think can give it that breadth that you need.
In terms of sexual harassment, as I mentioned, I would like to see in the definition those three different behaviours: “unwanted and unreciprocated” or “offensive romantic expressions or unwanted attention”, “bribes or threats that make circumstances of a worker's employment or advancement contingent on sexual co-operation”. That third component, which isn't currently in the Canada Labour Code, “insulting or hostile or degrading attitudes about a worker's gender” is something that I think needs to be added because it's so frequent and so common. I think it may be somewhat covered in the discrimination part of the law, but I think also incorporating it as part of sexual harassment, because it's so prevalent, would be helpful.