Well, it depends. Let's assume we're going to be talking about the RCMP and not other departments.
Any employee who has a concern about harassment has a number of different avenues available to them, and it's going to depend on what stage of the game and how serious.
For example, if it's euphemistically called a minor issue of harassment, the issue can be raised one on one with the individual concerned, it can be raised with a supervisor, informal conflict resolution can be sought, and so on and so forth. And the unions generally support informal conflict resolution if there's a well-developed policy and process within X department.
Should there be more serious or more numerous allegations of harassment where initial attempts to try to resolve them have failed, at that point in time an employee is faced with having to use one of a variety of means of redress.
In many environments they will come to the union right away and say, “We need your help. What's the best approach here?” In some other environments those environments are such where there's a fear of even coming to the union to discuss their concerns. I made a reference to that in the case of Donald Ray at my last sitting.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, someone comes to us with some allegations. We would obviously obtain more information to determine what's an appropriate course of action. Depending on the seriousness of the allegations and the department we're dealing with, in this case the RCMP, my personal inclination would be to say to a public servant, use the grievance process to resolve your harassment concerns rather than the internal complaint process, because at the present time we don't have confidence in the current process. And the grievance process gives people certain rights under other legislation that the internal complaint process doesn't.