Although Manitoba Human Rights Commission Intake Officer, Pat Daniels, first supported the merits of my complaint, it was evident there was undeniable pressure in the ensuing months to ‘get rid of the complaint'. Daniels redrafted the submitted July 2008 complaint to remove key points of the complaint. I was then repeatedly contacted by phone and email pressuring me to sign the redraft "as is" -- told that this was under the direction of the MHRC Executive Director.
Quite astonishingly, I was old by Daniels that the Respectful Workplace complaint (RWP) had ”the same authority as the Human Rights Code" and should therefore just drop the HRC complaint, and let the RWP run its course. Not to be taken for a fool, I responded by email, “I do not agree with you that the parties commissioned to hear matters pertaining to policy would, or should, be dealing with matters of law pertaining to the HRC.
Government filed its Reply on December 8, 2008. Three months later, after repeated and numerous requests I was given a copy of the Reply, but without attachments. The Reply made repeated references to so-called documents submitted as evidence (handwritten notes and memos that I had no knowledge of, and believe that they were likely fabricated after I had been removed from my position and done unlawfully in support of government's defence). Failed promises over the next year to provide said documents were dangled. Often, I would be waiting at home on the dates MHRC Investigator Nancy Flintoft promised to have the documents delivered, but they never came.
There was no hearing to address any inconsistencies of the loose interpretation of emails and events. Email from me to my Supervisor, with copy to CSC Commissioner and COO at the start of my 3.5 weeks stress leave pleading for help; stated I was in 'crisis,' felt 'de-humanized and 'was being treated like a dog.' The evidence of record was then incredibly spun by legal defence, stating to investigative authorities, that I "didn't actually really mean that I was in crisis."
What is more incredible?
- That a COO, who claimed was "not a psychiatrist" was able to make the clinical assessment of my mental state: "Marielle's perception that she was in crisis was 'off'' or,
- That the Civil Service Commission did not bother to ask what I meant by the word 'crisis' upon my return from 3.5 weeks of stress leave because (as sworn to) they wanted to respect my privacy or,
- That MHRC actually bought that bullish malarkey?
If you guessed all of the above, you would then be in agreement with me. If you qualified (#3) further, adding Flintoft's statement in MHRC Assessment that "employers are not psychiatrists" and therefore the employer could not possibly have seen this coming, then give yourself an additional bonus point. But unfortunately, we all seem to have taken about a 100- year step back in the advancement of mental health rights.
The delay in not sending the MHRC Reply was first said to be due to the fact that an investigator had to be assigned to remove any confidential material, then, they didn't have anyone to make copies, ... then, half a year later when I was given the Reply the attachments were not given. Flintof told me it should in no way affect my ability to complete a Rebuttal to the Reply.
Under Duty to Accommodate, I asked to be allowed to see the Reply with attachments because the anxiety and stress of not knowing what was claimed (especially in light of the Government's past transgressions) was adversely affecting my health as I was experiencing escalated manic thoughts and it was affecting my ability to sleep - which then usually leads to psychosis.. HRC responded "It hasn’t even been determined that you have a disability.”
One can see how easy it is to get swallowed up in details, but for professionals experienced and entrusted to do a good job, the issue should be a simple one. The most important thing must remain the most important thing. MHRC procedure is to record every communication (emails, phone calls, meetings, etc.) in its database. Entry dated August 22, 2008 from MHRC Intake Officer, Pat Daniels (accessed 2011) refers to an initial conversation with me after termination meeting of June 4th while still employed at OSD as to what is relevant under the Code for MHRC to accept an investigation:
Reviewed with (Marielle) that during our first calls I had very clearly advised her that we don’t get involved in personality conflicts and that to have a basis for a human rights complaint – it has to be based…on her disability. She spoke about the conflict resulted in her having to go on leave and the ultimate result of the meeting where employment basically terminated. However, she still spoke about the conflict. Again reminded her – under our leg., has to be based on one of our g.f. … Advised C that the complaint would then be based on the (termination) meeting. She agreed.
February 9, 2009 – Letter from me to MHRC Investigator Paula Hamilton
“...in December you advised that a determination as to whether my health issue was protected under the Human Rights Code had yet to be made. My doctor recently advised (January 30th) that he had not yet been requested to provide a medical report. Should a medical report be required, it may be prudent to do so at this time to avoid any further delays in the processing of the October 20, 2008 complaint. (doctor) advised paperwork is abundant and his time is limited so it will likely take awhile before he can get to it.”
The pre-investigative process took three times longer than the median 8-10 months causing me undue hardship and distress; constantly preoccupied with the details, reliving her experiences both at OSD and afterward; constantly reviewing the documentation. Both stressful and at times incapacitating. Bringing Down the Barriers: The Labour Market and Women with Disabilities in Ontario notes:
...women with disabilities in general have higher overall stress levels than any of the other groups regardless of living arrangements.
The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems to take longer.
Edward R. Murrow
No comments:
Post a Comment