Why Most HRT Complaints Are Filed
When an HRT Complaint is filed, it can be an indication of deeper issues at work.
Most HRT Complaints are not filed in order to retaliate against an employer when an employee is disgruntled. Rather, they are a sign that there are systemic issues in the workplace environment.
These formal grievances often act as a "canary in the coal mine," signaling that the existing internal mechanisms for conflict resolution have failed or that the culture has become fundamentally misaligned with equitable standards.
At the heart of many complaints is a breakdown in communication and trust between management and the workforce. When employees feel that their concerns are consistently ignored or that the corporate hierarchy protects exclusionary behavior, they turn to external legal frameworks to seek the fairness they cannot find within the office walls. This shift from internal dialogue to formal litigation suggests that the "open-door policy" many companies claim to have is either non-existent or perceived as a risk to the employee’s career longevity.
Ultimately, a complaint serves as a critical data point for leadership to audit their current practices. Instead of viewing the filing as an isolated act of defiance, proactive organizations treat it as a catalyst for cultural reform. By addressing the root causes—such as unconscious bias in promotion cycles, lack of diversity in leadership, or a general lack of psychological safety—employers can move beyond mere compliance and begin building a more resilient, inclusive workplace that values every contributor.
Manager’s Checklist: Executing the Duty to Inquire
Phase 1: Recognition & Observation
[ ] Identify the "Red Flags": Have you observed sudden, dramatic changes in performance, attendance, or behavior (e.g., a high performer becoming erratic, emotional outbursts, or chronic lateness)?
[ ] Rule out the "Normal": Is this behavior a significant departure from the employee’s established baseline or societal workplace norms?
[ ] Check for Ground Connection: Is there a reasonable basis to suspect the change might be related to a protected ground under the BC Human Rights Code (e.g., physical/mental disability, family status, or substance use)?
Phase 2: The Compassionate Inquiry
[ ] Select a Private Setting: Ensure the conversation happens in a confidential, non-threatening environment.
[ ] State the Facts, Not the Diagnosis: * Avoid: "I think you’re depressed."
Use: "I’ve noticed you’ve missed four deadlines this month, which is unlike you. I’m concerned—is there anything going on that we can support you with?"
[ ] Ask the "Magic Question": "Are there any barriers in the workplace—or factors we should be aware of—that are impacting your ability to perform your duties?"
[ ] Reiterate Support: Remind the employee of available resources, such as an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) or your internal accommodation policy.
Phase 3: Information Gathering (The "Need to Know" Rule)
[ ] Focus on Limitations, Not Diagnosis: Remember that in BC, you are generally entitled to know the restrictions (e.g., "cannot lift over 10lbs" or "needs a quiet space"), not the specific medical diagnosis.
[ ] Request Functional Information: If the employee confirms a need, ask for a functional assessment from their healthcare provider that outlines what they can and cannot do.
[ ] Maintain Confidentiality: Ensure all medical notes are stored in a separate, secure file—not the general personnel file.
Phase 4: Assessment & Implementation
[ ] Review Against Undue Hardship: Can the requested changes be made without creating significant safety risks or unaffordable costs?
[ ] Document the Search for Options: Even if the employee’s "preferred" accommodation isn't possible, have you documented the alternative "reasonable" options you explored?
[ ] Establish a Review Date: Accommodation is a process, not a one-time event. Schedule a follow-up to see if the changes are working.