Upload
stephanie-lyons
View
221
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Conducting Lawful Workplace Investigations:When Ignorance Isn’t Bliss - December 10, 2013
Sarah E. Graves, Sonia Regenbogen, Christina HallHeenan Blaikie LLP
Agenda
• Introduction and Overview
• Preparing for an Investigation
• Hot Topics
– Social Media and Privacy– Privilege– Whistleblowers– Drug & Alcohol Testing– Latest Developments
• Conducting Workplace Investigations
Agenda (Cont.)
• Developing Effective Interview Skills
• Key Issues in Different Investigations– Human Rights– Investigation of Serious Allegations– International & Cross-border Investigations– Health and Safety
When is an Investigation Necessary?
• Human rights legislation– Duty to provide discrimination-free workplace
– Do you need “a complaint?”
• Termination for just cause
• Policy violation/compliance issue
• Criminal or regulatory wrongdoing
• Occupational health and safety– Accident, bullying, or violence
Planning the Investigation
• Decision-makers are increasingly scrutinizing investigations
• Don’t expect perfection, but reasonableness– Training?– Bias?
• Planning is essential
Planning the Investigation (2)
Big Picture Items:
•Identify the allegations:– What specific issues are raised?– What laws are implicated?– What policies and practices are implicated?
Planning the Investigation (3)
Example Complaint:“Mr. L looks at me and says angrily, ‘you want a day off?’ I calmly say, ‘Yes’. He forcefully grips my left arm below the elbow, twisted it and jerked it to apply pressure, to throw me out of the bakery, [while] screaming irately, ‘get out!’”
No identification of workplace violence issue
Recommendation: “Mr. L should be counselled on how to handle this better.”
Planning the Investigation (4)
Big Picture Items (Cont.):
•Special skills required?– Forensic accountant, IT specialist, etc.
Planning the Investigation (5)
Big Picture Items (Cont.):
•Internal or external investigator?
•Who will oversee the investigation?– In-house, external, or even independent
counsel?
•Collective agreement constraints?
Evidence and Privilege:
•Privilege takes planning
– Critical role of counsel, in-house or external
•Identify the evidence/information you will need– Oral?– Physical?– Created?
Planning the Investigation (6)
Planning the Investigation (7)
Evidence and Privilege (Cont.):
•Preservation of evidence– Litigation hold to ensure documents not destroyed– Understand document retention policy
•Beware spoliation of evidence allegations– Remedy = adverse presumption
•Ensure safe storage of evidence
Planning the Investigation (8)
Parties and witnesses
•Confidentiality
•Order of interviews
•Location of interviews
•Administrative suspensions? (with pay)
•Reprisal
Key Issue: Unions and Investigations
• Is the investigation procedure incorporated into the collective agreement?– Directly, referentially, LOU?
• Necessity of shop steward’s participation?– Different for complainant, respondent, witnesses
• Conflict when both complainant and respondent are represented by the same union
Who Should Conduct the Investigation?
• Internal– Minor issues that can be resolved without
discipline or sanction– Policy violations that won’t result in liability
• External– Violations of law or policy exposing company
to civil or criminal liability– Particularly sensitive issues– Complaint involves senior management
Role of In-House Counsel?
• As investigator– Can in-house counsel be perceived as
completely objective and independent?
• As advisor to external investigator– Someone who “knows the ropes”
• As advisor and counsel to internal investigator– Groundwork for privilege
Privacy & Social Media
• People love social media– 20% of time on PCs spent on social media– 30% of time spent on mobile devices is spent
on social media– Users spend over 700 billion minutes per
month on Facebook
Privacy & Social Media
• Key Issues– Are you in a jurisdiction with privacy
legislation? (Federal, Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec)
– No privacy legislation• Reasonable expectation of Privacy?• Policy?
Privacy & Social Media
• Public Sector?– Ontario
• Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
• Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Privacy & Social Media
• R. v. Cole:– If personal use of work computer permitted, then
reasonable expectation of privacy• Policy may diminish, but not erase, expectation
– Was subjective expectation of privacy objectively reasonable? Info near “biographical core”?
– Charter-bound employers: reasonable basis?– Private employers: some basis? (not 50+1)
Privacy & Social Media
• Common Law Privacy Tort– Jones v. Tsige 2012 ONCA 32
• Limited application:– “…deliberate and significant invasions of personal
privacy.”– Invasions of personal privacy which would potentially
qualify are limited and would include matters such as “financial or health records, sexual practices and orientation, employment, diary or private correspondence.”
Privacy & Social Media
• Employers cannot eliminate an employers right to privacy; but they can limit it.
• Social Media Policy– Educates employees about appropriate usage– Protects legitimate employer interests– Provides a basis for discipline
Privacy & Social Media
• Electronic Monitoring v. Employee Privacy
• 4 Key Questions:– Is there a legitimate problem that needs to be addressed?– Will monitoring social media use address the problem?– Have less invasive ways to address the problem been
considered and proven effective?– Are monitoring activities conducted reasonably?
Evidence issues and Social Media
• Courts have refused to admit social media pages as evidence if they are not properly authenticated
Solicitor-Client Privilege
Three-Part Test:
•Communications concerning…1. Legal advice;
2. Where client intended communication to be confidential; and
3. Communication must not have had an illegal purpose
Solicitor-Client Privilege (2)
Necessity of legal analysis and opinion?•R. v. Bruce Power (OCA)
– No “legal strategy/opinion” in internal accident report
– BUT fact prepared at request of ext. counsel retained right after accident established S-C privilege
– Also highly prejudicial items in report indicated intent that report be covered by S-C privilege
•Compare, Re North Bay General Hospital (Arb)– Absent advice, fact-finding conducted by person who
happens to be lawyer does not create S-C privilege
Litigation Privilege
Two-Part Test:
•Protects documents and work product…1. Prepared for the dominant purpose of
litigation; and
2. Where litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated
Litigation Privilege (2)
“Dominant purpose” of litigation?
•BMO v. Tortora (BCSC)– Alleged fraud; external counsel retained fraud
examiner to investigate; findings led to dismissal
– Employer refused to disclose report, claimed privilege
– Court: litigation privilege protects only those documents prepared after decision to terminate
Litigation Privilege (3)
“Dominant purpose” of litigation? (Cont.)
•Re Peel District School Board (Arb)– Teacher suspended during investigation when guilt
materialized; investigation continued for two years
– Union demanded disclosure of investigation notes
– Arbitrator: while litigation reasonably anticipated after suspension, dominant purpose of notes were for investigation, not litigation
Waiver of Privilege
Inadvertent Waiver vs. Judicial Fairness
•Fernandes v. Marketforce Comm. (Ont. SCJ)– Employer accidentally copied employee on
e-mail to lawyer about its desire to fire her– Employee claimed wrongful dismissal as a result– Motions Judge & Appeal: E-mail was S-C
privileged, but it “affected state of mind” and was “catalyst” for wrongful dismissal action
– Unfair to deny remedy
Whistleblowers
• Private Sector: No general protection for whistleblowers in Canada
• Public Sector: Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act
Whistleblowers
• S. 425.1 of the Criminal Code protects employees from retaliation for whistleblowing re: statutory compliance
• Reprisal
• Others– Employment Standards– Environmental Protection Act– Publicly traded companies re: securities fraud
Drug and Alcohol Testing
• No explicit duty, or authorization, to test in any jurisdiction in Canada but generally speaking, the law has upheld:– Post-incident testing– Reasonable cause testing– Return to work following treatment testing
• CAUTION - Pre-employment and random testing difficult to uphold in most cases
Drug and Alcohol Testing (2)
• Post-incident – best practices– Typically safety sensitive positions– Incident caused injury, fatality, significant
property damage, etc. or “near miss”– Only if employee’s actions could have played
a role in the incident• E.g. No testing if clear mechanical failure
– Ensure testing safeguards are in place
Drug and Alcohol Testing (3)
• Reasonable cause – best practices– Typically sensitive positions– Have a team of supervisors/managers that
are trained to conduct the assessments– Assessments done by a team if possible– Checklists, forms– Ensure testing safeguards are in place
Drug and Alcohol Testing (4)
• Return to work following treatment – best practices– Return to duty test generally acceptable– Further follow-up testing as per medical
recommendations, not employer choice– Consequences of further positive test
Drug and Alcohol Testing (5)
• The DO’s– Use reliable and experienced lab, MRO, SAP– Have clear accommodation procedures– Lead workplace training and advise of support
mechanisms (EAP, etc.)
• The DON’Ts– Adopt US policies without tailoring them– Overreach with testing– Require automatic termination for a positive test
Case Law Developments
Adjudicator Reliance on Investigations
•Tribunal may rely on investigation finding that some or all allegations unsubstantiated
– Rule 19A summary dismissal hearing– Hoyes v. Woodbine, 2011 HRTO 578
Case Law Developments (2)
Adjudicator Reliance on Investigations (Cont.)
•Tribunal may also accept investigation report into evidence (on consent), removing need for direct evidence
– Newton v. Toronto (City), 2010 HRTO 1023– City investigation took 6 months, 19 witnesses– Relying on report, Tribunal held 1 day hearing
focused on remedy
The Investigation Process
• General indicia of a sound investigation process: was the investigation…
…prompt?
…thorough?
…fair/appropriate in the circumstances?
• Was the respondent given enough information and opportunity to respond? –Beware “The Element of Surprise”
The Investigation Process (2)
Investigator’s Responsibilities:
•Fair, neutral, open minded fact-finder– Job is to gather facts, not draw conclusions
•Thorough, organized– Hallmark of a careful investigation is the file– Suggestion: keep running log of all steps taken
•Professional, direct, responsive
•Know and follow the investigation policy!
The Investigation Process (3)
Taking the Complaint:
•Define the complaint / incident– What is being alleged?
•Unpack the complaint / incident– What specific components/issues need to be
investigated?
The Investigation Process (4)
Taking the Complaint (Cont.):
•Meet with the Complainant and get sign off on his or her complaint
– No editorializing!– Use precise / accurate language– Record all relevant facts and dates
•Obtain list of proposed witnesses– Who has what evidence and why?
The Investigation Process (5)
Litigation Holds:
•Review document retention policy
•Work with IT to ensure no documents are lost
The Investigation Process (6)
Establishing Privilege
•Deputizing memo / retainer letter– Use language indicating advice and/or analysis
•Document protocol– Mark documents ad privileged– How to handle drafts, summaries, reports
•Generating work product
•E-mails
The Investigation Process (7)
Collecting Physical Evidence:
•Collect all documents that may be relevant:– Signed acknowledgement of policy/training– Notes/reports of prior incidents– Notes kept by Complainant or others– Video surveillance, e-mails, photos/social media
•Store in centralized, organized, secure location
The Investigation Process (8)
Collecting Oral Evidence:
•Consider interview time/location/atmosphere– Maximize comfort to minimize reluctance– Goal is to build rapport with interviewee
•Allow sufficient time for interviews– Typically longer than initial estimate
The Investigation Process (9)
Collecting Oral Evidence (Cont.):
•Outline purpose and process of interview
•Address protection from retaliation
•Confidentiality
•Witness statement
The Investigation Process (10)
Taking Notes:
•Tell interviewee to watch your pen to gauge pace– Do not let pace/note-taking interfere with listening!– Write legibly
•Record what witness says – do not paraphrase– Do not include commentary or impressions
•Sign and date notes
•Avoid multiple sets of notes per interview
The Investigation Process (11)
Taking Notes (Cont.):
•If type up notes afterwards:– Do not add or embellish content– Do transcribe shortly after interview, and note
date the transcription took place– Do not destroy the original interview notes!
•Beware audio recording’s chilling effect
Consequences of Flawed Investigations
• Key Mistakes!– Failure to act at all or take it seriously– Failure to train investigators– Failure to plan– Poor file– Not prompt and/or thorough– Not opportunity to respond– Failure to keep complainant informed– No follow-up/decision not implemented
Consequences of Flawed Investigations (2)
• Impair or prejudice ability to establish…– Just cause for termination / discipline– Due diligence under OHSA– Due diligence under Human Rights Code
• Consequences include…– Aggravated, punitive, or Code damages– Penalties from Ministry of Labour under OHSA– Reinstatement in unionized workplaces
• Embarrassing reported decision!
Confidentiality
• Dangerous claims
• Confidentiality cannot always be guaranteed– Business/investigation needs may override– Explain information shared only on “need to
know” basis
• Ensure witnesses sign confidentiality
agreements
Avoiding Reprisal Claims
• There can be no merits to the complaint, but still merits to the reprisal!
• File retention:– After investigation, gather any/all related notes,
documents, etc. and place in file
• Explain consequences of reprisal to managers
Practical Interview Skills
• Avoid script, but prepare list of specific items looking for from interviewee– Do not conclude interview before reviewing
• Control the pace and listen actively
Practical Interview Skills (2)
• Funnel or Pyramid Technique– Open Phase– Clarification Phase– Closing the Door
• Active listening
• Assessing credibility
Practical Interview Skills (3)
Open Phase:
•Open-ended questions
•Learn all relevant evidence the witness has– Encourage the witness to talk
•Summarize the answer so witness can give you the facts that might have been left out
Practical Interview Skills (4)
Clarification:
•Get the details – W-5
•Try not to interrupt
•React neutrally at all times
•Explore basis for interviewee’s conclusion
Practical Interview Skills (5)
Close the Door:
•Get the final answer
•Listen to the witness
•Exhaust the subject?
•Is there anything else?
•Have you now told me everything you recall about…?
Practical Interview Skills (6)
• Before closing the interview…:– Confirm details witness has provided– (Optional) Review notes with witness– Confidentiality agreement?
Handling Difficult Witnesses
• Stay calm/neutral to avoid increasing hostility
• Avoid badgering questions– BUT do not shy away from questions either
• Make it clear that you will end the interview and proceed in absence of his/her evidence if:– Witness is highly argumentative– Witness is obstructive– Witness refuses to cooperate
Handling Difficult Witnesses (2)
• Listen actively and neutrally to difficult witnesses’ version of events– Listen for inconsistencies and challenge based
on information already obtained
• Do not accept “I would never do that”– Ask what actually happened
• If witness avoids a question, make a note and come back to it later
Other Challenges (2)
• What is interviewee cancels or withdraws participation?– Explain role of investigation in company’s legal
duties and that findings may be made without his/her input
– Reaffirm protection from reprisals
Other Challenges (3)
• The lying employee– If Respondent, answer is clear– If witness or Complainant, consider seniority
(fiduciary?) and impact on conduct of investigation
• Remember, no reprisal for having complained or participated in investigation only– No protection for lying throughout same!
Human Rights Investigations
• Statutory duty to investigate allegations of discrimination and harassment– Failure to do so will itself result in Code liability
• Employer responsibilities– Policy/complaint procedure– Training– Serious, prompt, sensitive, reasonable investigation– Resolution: “healthy work environment”?
Human Rights Investigations (2)
• Harassment/discrimination investigations call for “softer” skill set– Purpose often tied to damage control and
maintaining employee morale– Witnesses may be reluctant to participate as
complaints involves managers
• Due diligence and vicarious Code liability
Just Cause Investigations
• Termination for just cause– “The capital punishment of employment law”
• Employer must properly investigate:– To prove misconduct actually occurred; AND– Rebut allegations that termination in bad faith
Just Cause Investigations (2)
• Just cause investigation can call for a range of “hard” skill sets depending on allegation, e.g.:– Theft, fraud, criminal conduct– Sexual harassment, inappropriate relationship– Policy violation, conflict of interest– Negligent derelict of duty
• Closer the allegation to criminal conduct, more vigorously courts scrutinize the investigation
Fraud Investigations
• Purpose of fraud investigation:– Determine extent of loss– Stem future losses– Recover funds– Build case for just cause
• “Look below the ice” and expect the worse
• Beware: premature accusations can lead to destruction of crucial evidence
Fraud Investigations (2)
• Role of Forensic Accountant– Independent/unbiased– Where fraud suspected, can investigate under
guise of internal control evaluations– Expertise in conducting investigation with criminal
proceedings in mind (protecting evidence)– Expertise in giving testimony, writing reports
Fraud Investigations (3)
• When to terminate for fraud?– Strong, defensible conclusions in forensic report– Employee admits to allegations
• Given implications, courts will demand:– Proof on higher degree of probability– Evidence of intent, deception or deliberate scheme– Employee given a chance to respond– Thorough investigation of all given explanations
Fraud Investigations (4)
• What if participation in fraud not directly established?
• Consider termination for cause based on:– Breach of company policy– Dishonesty (especially if during investigation)– Breach of trust/revelation of character
• Bottom line: “can they ever be trusted again?”
Fraud Investigations (5)
• Impact of Police involvement– Relinquish control of investigation; lose ability to
investigate and resolve matter discretely– Evidence seized– Workplace disruptions– ** Malicious prosecution risk if exculpatory
evidence somehow withheld or overlooked
• Query: when should Police be contacted?
Fraud Investigations (6)
• Do not threaten criminal proceedings!– Criminal Code s. 346 (extortion)– Pate v. Galway-Cavendish, 2011 ONCA 329
• Risks of investigating fraud– Malicious prosecution actions– Punitive/aggravated damages– Intentional infliction of mental suffering– Invasion of privacy
International and Cross-border Investigations
• Facilities in more than one jurisdiction
• Among the most challenging investigations
• Not business as usual
• Special circumstances
International & Cross-border Investigations
• Privilege– Laws re: privilege vary significantly from
country to country– In-house counsel and foreign lawyers
International and Cross-border Investigations
• Privacy Considerations– In Europe privacy often viewed as
fundamental right; criminal liability e.g. France
International & Cross-border Investigations
• Language Issues?– Translation
• Consult local counsel?– Time lines– Local law
International & Cross-border Investigations
• Data Transfer and Personal Data
• Conducting employee interviews
• Blocking statutes– Prohibit export of information requests that
are tied to foreign legal proceedings– Exceptions through Hague Convention
Health and Safety
• Inspectors - routine regulatory compliance– Powers of inspectors; issuing orders
• Power to recommend prosecution– For any contravention or failure to comply with
OHSA and regulations or failure to comply with MOL order
– No requirement for an accident or injury – One year limitation period
Health and Safety (2)
• Preparation is key. An Accident Response Plan accounts for:– What typically happens in the aftermath of an
accident– Who you will have to deal with– What your organization’s (and management’s)
legal rights and obligations are– Key risk management strategies
Health and Safety (3)
• Key Accident Response Plan Elements:– Immediate steps (medical, preservation of
scene, notice to regulator)– The need for an accident coordinator– Cooperation but not self-incrimination– Shadowing the MOL investigation– Dealing with warrants
Health and Safety (4)
• Key Accident Response Plan elements:– Dealing with document and interview requests– Retaining experts and outside counsel– Dealing with media– Responding to orders
Health and Safety (5)
• Detailed internal investigation– Internal investigation report can be protected
by solicitor-client or litigation privilege
• Expert assistance expert reports – required?
• Statements from witness to events– Ask to be present for interviews
• Statements from supervisors, managers– Red flag
Health and Safety (6)
• If a regulator arrives with a search warrant:– Managing the process– Inspect warrant, copy– Observe and make detailed notes of warrant
execution
Concluding the Investigation: Saying When
• Is the question answered?
• Satisfied that investigation is…– Procedurally defensible?– Substantively defensible?
Credibility Determinations
• Does the interviewee have…– Direct or indirect knowledge of matter?
– Any motive to misrepresent information?
• Look for:– Contradictions with own or other versions of
events
– Changes in story, no matter how minor
– Methods to independently verify story
Credibility Determinations (2)
• Don’t underestimate “gut” reaction!
• Your “gut” may pick up on subtle things like…– Body language– Eye contact– Hesitation in delivery
• Above all, does the person’s story make sense?
Investigation Report
Components:
•Executive summary
•Background to complaint
•Overview of investigation process– aka “methodology”
•Allegations and findings
•Conclusion
•(If mandated) Recommendation
Investigation Report (2)
Best Practices:
•“Just the facts”– No opinions– No recommendations, unless mandate for
•Inconclusive?
•Assess each allegation separately
Investigation Report (3)
Best Practices (Cont.):
•Clearly state how interviewee came by his/her knowledge of matter
•Be sure all relevant evidence is considered
•Keep your audience in mind
Common Mistakes in Report Writing
• Omitting reference to evidence because of view that not relevant
• Forgetting to “show your work”– Connect each dot for the reader
• Letting value judgments opinions infect analysis– e.g. “Helena is an admitted cocaine user;
therefore it’s clear that…”
Common Mistakes in Report Writing (2)
• Over-emphasis on similar fact evidence
• Over-emphasis on character evidence– Red flag for evidence of bias or prejudgment
• Acknowledge existence of both, but let facts discovered in this investigation speak for selves
Thank You!
Sarah E. Graves, Partner
Sonia Regenbogen, Partner
Christina Hall, Associate