Human Resources committee  In a survey we did with our members a year ago, we asked them what kind of time frame they had in their policies and were committed to. It turns out that the deadline for completing investigations is between 30 and 45 days on average. That is quite quick. In my environment, in a professional order, when someone asks a syndic to conduct an investigation of an ethical nature into a member's behaviour, a whole investigative process is set in motion.

Human Resources committee  I'll offer, if I can, wording from one of the provincial...that “psychological harassment at work is a vexatious behaviour in the form of repeated conduct, verbal comments, actions or gestures that are hostile or unwanted, that affect the employee's dignity or psychological or physical integrity. that make the work environment harmful.”

Human Resources committee  That's correct, and who drives the investigation needs to be very clear.

Human Resources committee  There is no doubt that this kind of behavioural change takes place over. We know that when we work on human behaviour, it takes a lot of time. It's true that we had policies, and we offered training. In terms of results, compared to the situation 15 years ago, I daresay there has been an improvement.

Human Resources committee  I've seen a lot of organizations that are actually quite efficient. They have in their policy a time frame that is reasonable. The more bureaucratic we become in the investigation and in terms of who's involved and who needs to be consulted, I think that's where it takes time. There are very effective processes in both unionized and non-unionized settings.

Human Resources committee  This is clearly an improvement. An investigation must be conducted when a complaint has been filed, but if no complaint has been filed, it is useless. In a small environment, sometimes the relationship with the supervisor is involved. Until it is clarified, if the harasser is the supervisor or boss, it will be ineffective.

Human Resources committee  I would also support that.

Human Resources committee  What's important is that an employer still has the right to manage employees. The right to manage remains important. For example, as an employer, I have the right to manage deadlines, and if the deadlines I manage are reasonable, no one can say that I'm harassing my employee. It is all in how things are done.

Human Resources committee  Ontario and Quebec, actually. I have not looked at all the rest of the country; perhaps you can tell me that these things exist in all provinces.

Human Resources committee  Yes. In Quebec, the concept of psychological harassment is defined in the legislation and includes sexual harassment. The concept is clearly set out. It is vexatious behaviour. Since the legislation came into effect in 2004, it has been very important for employers and employees to understand what harassment is.

Human Resources committee  It is important to preserve the right to manage and to make it clear that, especially with respect to psychological harassment, employers must retain the right to manage the performance of their employees and deadlines and to follow up. It is important to keep this notion of the employer's right to manage.

Human Resources committee  I have included it in our brief.

Human Resources committee  I am sure you know which is the best organization to direct the employee to. I do not know all the mechanisms at federal level. But it is important to direct the person to an organization that is impartial. The process also has to be simple. As I understand the situation in Quebec, the Commission des normes de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail deals with some cases.

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. We at CPHR Canada are honoured to appear before your committee for the study of Bill C-65. CPHR Canada is a group of human resources associations across Canada. CPHR Canada is the national voice on the enhancement and promotion of the human resources profession.

Human Resources committee  You did fantastic.