Date:
2011-11-29
Number:
081-1
Issued under the authority of the Assistant Commissioner, Policy, Correctional Service of Canada
1. To ensure a fair and expeditious offender complaint and grievance process by providing further information on the process and its application.
2. To provide clarification regarding:
3. Commissioner's Directive 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances
4. These Guidelines apply to both staff members and offenders involved in the resolution of issues that may arise between the two parties.
5. These Guidelines also apply to any staff member involved in the processing, analysis, and responding to offender complaints and/or grievances, as well as those offenders involved in the complaint and grievance process.
6. Once completed, complaint and grievance submissions are considered "Protected B" information. For details on the hierarchy of classified information, refer to the Guide to Information Security.
7. The four levels of the offender complaint and grievance process are:
8. Some grievances must be automatically initiated at higher levels than the complaint level, such as:
9. Upon receipt of a complaint/grievance, the Grievance Coordinator/Clerk will:
Please refer to the Grievance Code Reference Guide for additional information on, and description of the codes.
10. When a complaint is first filed, it must be assigned a grievance code in OMS as follows:
11. The grievance code will remain the same throughout the grievance process. It is important that the grievance be properly coded for statistical purposes and to ensure that the complaint/ grievance is prioritized appropriately. If you experience problems choosing a code, do not hesitate to contact your Regional Grievance Coordinator or the National Grievance Coordinator.
12. The responsibility for assigning grievance codes rests solely with the individual performing duties of the Grievance Coordinator. This is inclusive of instances where the offender himself/herself writes the grievance code on the submission.
Please see the helpful checklist for coding harassment, discrimination or staff performance grievances on the InfoNet.
Please refer to Annex A of CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances for specific definitions.
13. Once a complaint/grievance has been assigned a grievance code, it may also need to be classified as high priority if it relates to an issue that is seen to have a significant impact on an offender's rights and freedoms. If high priority status is not required, the complaint/grievance will remain routine priority.
14. Certain grievance codes are automatically assigned a high priority status when entered in OMS (see list in the Grievance Code Reference Guide). Other grievance codes can also be assigned a high priority status depending on the subject matter being grieved. High priority status is not limited to the identified list.
15. Complaints/grievances that the Grievance Coordinator deems urgent must be forwarded to the Institutional Head who will then decide whether the complaint/grievance should be assigned high priority status and will provide a response, if practicable, in time to meet the deadline arising from the matter.
16. An example of an urgent complaint/grievance is the denial of a temporary absence to visit a terminally ill relative. Such a case should immediately be brought to the attention of the Institutional Head who will promptly review the decision and either overturn or support the denial of the temporary absence.
17. Complaints and first-level grievances that are identified as sensitive are forwarded directly to the Institutional Head in a sealed and "Protected" envelope. The Institutional Head will decide whether the complaint/grievance should be assigned a sensitive status. The sensitive submission will then be investigated as a high priority, first-level grievance within the 15 working-day timeframe. The sensitive status of a complaint/grievance must be recorded in OMS.
18. When the Institutional Head does not consider a complaint or first-level grievance to be sensitive, the complaint must be returned to the grievor with a rationale for the decision, at which point the grievor may resubmit the issue as a complaint or grieve the Institutional Head's decision to the second level. If the grievance is submitted to the second level and the issue is determined to be sensitive, the second-level decision maker may, as corrective action, either refer the sensitive issue back to the first level or respond to it directly. The same procedures apply if the matter is grieved to the third level.
19. Other information that might cause a complaint/ grievance to be considered sensitive include:
20. As required by paragraph 42 b of CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances, the third-level decision maker will consult the following subject-matter experts prior to approving the corresponding grievances:
21. In the case that an offender is:
22. In all cases:
23. The decision maker will determine the corrective action that best resolves the complaint/grievance and ensures that similar problems do not occur in the future. Some considerations for determining and implementing corrective action are the following:
24. When transmitting a complaint/grievance to the next level for review and response:
25. In deciding whether to designate an offender as a multiple grievor, the Institutional Head or delegate may consider:
26. The decision maker must also ensure the following:
27. When an offender is transferred or is released from the institution and is subsequently re-admitted, his/her multiple grievor status must be re-assessed. Sufficient time must be given to determine whether the offender consistently maintains multiple grievor activity.
28. The decision maker is responsible for deciding if the submission, if proven, would constitute harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination, when reviewing the allegations. At this point, it is not necessary to determine if harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination actually took place, but only that the conduct complained of meets the definition of harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination.
29. If the decision maker decides that the allegations do not describe harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination, he/she must justify this decision to the offender in the response.
30. The grievor may grieve to the next level the decision not to investigate the grievance as harassment, sexual harassment, or discrimination. (In the case of a third-level decision, the grievor may submit a third-level grievance regarding this issue.) The grievor must be informed that the substantive issue that he/she raised (e.g. an isolated incident related to staff performance or another decision) can be addressed at the lowest possible level.
31. If the decision maker decides that the allegations describe harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination, he/she must consider convening an outside investigation into the matter to determine if the alleged harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination actually occurred.
32. The decision maker may decide to respond immediately to a grievance that describes harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination when he/she feels there is sufficient information available to ascertain whether the misconduct actually occurred, without resorting to an outside investigation.
33. Where the decision maker decides to respond to the grievance without convening an outside investigation, the accuracy of the information on which he/she makes this determination must be substantiated clearly in the response.
Please see the helpful checklist for a template of a Convening Order on the InfoNet.
34. Where an outside investigation is convened, a copy of the Convening Order must be sent to the grievor, the Office of the Correctional Investigator, the Regional Deputy Commissioner and the Director, Offender Redress. The grievance must also be deferred in OMS pending the completion of the investigation.
Note: For clarification on the process for deferring a grievance, please refer to Annex C of these Guidelines.
35. The party responsible for convening the outside investigation must ensure that:
36. A draft of the investigation report should be completed within the timeframe outlined in the Convening Order, which should not exceed three months from the time the investigation was convened.
37. The draft investigation report and final investigation report are subject to the Privacy Act. Vetting of this report may be required. The decision maker makes this decision after consulting with the Access to Information and Privacy Division. In the interest of fairness and the perceived integrity of the process, and in order to ensure accuracy, completeness and accountability, there should be maximum disclosure of information to the parties prior to final sign-off of the report.
38. The investigator will provide appropriate versions of the draft report, vetted for administrative fairness and privacy purposes, to the grievor, the respondent, the individual who convened the investigation and other persons about whom adverse comments are included.
39. The final investigation report should be an accurate and complete account of findings and conclusions. It should include both the grievor's and the accused's comments on the draft report.
40. The final investigation report should be provided to the person who convened the investigation and a copy should be shared with the Regional Deputy Commissioner, the Director, Offender Redress, and the Office of the Correctional Investigator.
41. The person who convened the outside investigation must inform the grievor and the accused, in writing, of the outcome of the investigation. A vetted copy of the final report must be shared with the grievor and the accused.
42. Upon receipt of the final investigation report, the decision maker will ensure that the grievance is reactivated in OMS at the level at which the investigation was convened. A grievance response will be prepared taking into account the conclusions of the outside investigation.
43. During the investigation of a complaint or grievance, the Analyst may contact appropriate persons involved in the grievance such as operational staff, subject matter experts and, where required, the offender.
44. An interview must be conducted with the offender if the offender has requested an interview, when the complaint or first-level grievance is first received at the institution, parole office or Community Correctional Centre, unless there are unusual circumstances which do not permit it or the offender refuses. If the offender resides at a different institution than where the investigation is being conducted, an interview must still be conducted. At the regional and national levels, the offender may be interviewed if it is considered necessary in order to conduct a thorough investigation.
45. When the signing authority for complaints/ grievances has been delegated, a copy of the memo stating that the authority has been delegated and specifying a clear timeframe must be forwarded to Regional Headquarters and to Offender Redress at National Headquarters, via email to "GEN-NHQ OFFENDER REDRESS". Delegation of authority is authorized only where the delegate is the immediate subordinate of the decision maker.
46. Grievances submitted by offenders on segregated status should be collected and assessed on a daily basis. Those grievances that are assessed as high priority will be brought immediately to the attention of the Institutional Head.
Please refer to Annex A of CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances for a definition of the Inmate Grievance Committee (IGC).
47. Where the grievor wishes that his/her grievance be reviewed by the IGC, he/she should complete a Request for Inmate Grievance Committee Recommendations (CSC/SCC 0103-B)
48. Where the Institutional Head wishes to refer an offender's grievance to the IGC, the grievor must sign a Consent for Disclosure of Personal Information (Inmate) (CSC/SCC 0487) prior to the sharing of information with the IGC.
49. When a request for a grievance review by the IGC has been made, the Institutional Head must refer the case to the IGC as soon as possible, and the grievance will be deferred. The deferral and its purpose must be clearly indicated in OMS.
50. The IGC shall review the response to the complaint, if one exists, and any relevant documents referred to or prepared in support of the response.
51. Administrative fairness will be provided to the grievor and to all other parties who may be adversely affected by the grievance. To this end, the grievor and other persons involved in the matters being grieved may present witnesses if the IGC Chairperson considers their input to be relevant. The grievor may ask questions to the IGC Chairperson as required, but cross-examination of staff members is not permitted.
52. The recommendation(s) of the IGC will be forwarded to the Institutional Head within 10 working days from the offender's request or the Institutional Head's referral to the IGC.
53. Documents of a sensitive or confidential nature shall not be shared with the IGC.
54. The process is reactivated upon receipt of the recommendations, and the Institutional Head or delegate will render the decision.
55. The Institutional Head is at liberty to accept the recommendation(s) of the IGC or not. However, where the Institutional Head disagrees with the IGC, he/she must record the reasons for the disagreement in the response to the offender.
Please refer to Annex A of CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances for a definition of the Outside Review Board (ORB).
56. Where a grievor wishes that the Institutional Head refer his/her first-level grievance submission and the response to the ORB for review before appealing to the second level, he/she must complete the Request for Outside Review (CSC/SCC 0359).
57. When an outside review has been requested, the Institutional Head must refer the case to the ORB as soon as possible.
58. The Institutional Head will ensure that the grievor is notified of the ORB hearing and of the date when a decision is expected.
59. The ORB may review pertinent documents and conduct a hearing with the grievor and any relevant witnesses. Administrative fairness, as required, will be provided to all participants. To this end, the grievor and other persons involved in the matters being grieved may present witnesses if the ORB Chairperson considers their input to be relevant. The grievor may produce supporting documents and pose questions to the ORB Chairperson as required, but cross-examination of staff members is not permitted.
60. The ORB Chairperson will record a summary of the investigation and the recommendation(s) on the grievor's original Request for Outside Review (CSC/SCC 0359).
61. The Institutional Head will inform the grievor, in writing, of the ORB's recommendation(s).
62. Upon receipt of the ORB's recommendation(s), the Institutional Head will issue a new response taking into consideration those recommendations.
63. A separate administrative review process is in place for use of force incidents. As per CD 567-1 - Use of Force, all use of force incidents are to be reviewed at the institutional, regional and national levels. The use of force review process can be considered complete only once the national review of the incident has been conducted.
64. All grievances related to the actual use of force, or the use of force review process, will be systematically registered as third-level grievances and forwarded to the Offender Redress Division, at National Headquarters, for review.
65. As part of the review of these grievances, consultation with the Director General, Security, will be carried out and an analysis will be conducted to determine whether the administrative review process for incidents involving use of force was followed. The results of the reviews of the incident, at all levels of the internal review process, will be considered.
66. This does not apply to a grievance concerning an issue that arose as a result of a use of force incident (e.g. an involuntary transfer as a result of a use of force incident), nor does it apply to grievances about health care treatments or assessments outside the medical assessment required by CD 567-1 - Use of Force. These matters will continue to be reviewed at the appropriate levels of the complaint/grievance process.
Assistant Commissioner, Policy,
Original signed by:
Ian McCowan
CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances
Grievance Code Reference Guide
Guide to Information Security
Offender Complaint and Grievance Training Modules
Offender Redress OMSR User Guide
Can I? May I? Should I? Getting It Right In Corrections
A decision for or against placement in administrative segregation was unfair or improperly made, or an offender wants to get into or out of administrative segregation; the procedures pertaining to placement in segregation, right of recourse to the services of legal counsel at the time of placement in administrative segregation, the reviews and recommendations of the Segregation Review Board, the rationale for maintenance in administrative segregation, the segregation period and the review by Regional Headquarters every 60 days. (Note: An Independent Chairperson's decision to place an offender in disciplinary segregation cannot be grieved.)
Some aspect of the living conditions in the administrative segregation or disciplinary segregation areas, or perceived unfair treatment experienced by a segregated offender because of segregated status; the programs and services available in segregation, staff visits to the segregation area, daily visits from health services professionals, the opportunity to exercise at least one hour a day, and access to showers and telephones.
The provision of clothing, footwear, linens and other personal care items, excluding those prescribed for medical or health reasons.
The provision of physical shelter or the use of physical space in the institution as it relates to offenders, such as the delivery of water, heat, light, ventilation, cell furniture, cell sanitation, and cell assignment. This also covers institutional grounds, trailer units and issues such as the CSC smoking policy.
The quality or quantity of food or the food service, including prescribed special diets or religious diets.
The institutional routine - the timing of meals or activities, the frequency and timing of offender counts, control of offender movements inside the perimeter, opportunities for socializing and offender privileges during incarceration, the use of identification cards, and access to basic legal documents.
Issues related to shared accommodation, double occupancy, move from single occupancy to shared accommodation, and the assessment and/or decision to place an offender in shared accommodations.
The operation of the institutional health services centre, for example, procedures for appointments, hours of clinics, availability of physicians and specialists, distribution of medication, and availability and allocation of health services beds.
The psychological or psychiatric care, which is offered at the institutions. This category encompasses all aspects of psychiatric and psychological care, including access to treatment, staff, medication, the quality of treatment, counselling, and psychological and psychiatric assessments.
Urgent or emergency medical treatment, including: access to medication and treatment (when a delay or lack of treatment might endanger the life of an offender) as well as problems concerning prescriptions. Emergency health services (i.e., delay of the service will endanger the life of the offender); urgent health services (i.e., the condition is likely to deteriorate to an emergency or affect the offender's ability to carry on the activities of daily living). Also included is dental care for acute dental conditions where the offender is experiencing swelling, pain or trauma (i.e., necessary fillings, extractions, etc.)
Reasonable access to routine medical or dental care, i.e., treatment not listed as urgent. This includes acquisition of medical, removable dental and optometric prostheses and appliances as well as medical decisions relating to therapeutic diets. Non-essential health services treatment includes a refusal by a physician to excuse an offender from his work assignment because of alleged symptoms of physical or mental incapacity, refusals or delays in obtaining orthopedic shoes or refusal to provide a special or supplemental mattress for an offender claiming to have back problems.
Health services treatment provided in the community to offenders on day parole, full parole or statutory release.
The personal and professional requirements, as well as the code of conduct applicable to institutional health services staff.
The communication or release of medical information, including medical history, information on the offender's current medical condition, or results of a psychiatric or psychological evaluation, in a manner that does not respect pertinent legislation, or for uses other than authorized.
Placement in a program that promotes the realization of the objectives established in the offender's Correctional Plan. This category encompasses all aspects of offender placement in employment, therapy, vocational training or an academic study program, as well as changes to the types of programs assigned; the removal of an offender from an employment, training or study position, or procedural violations (for example, the Board must communicate its decision and reasons to the offender in writing).
The conditions of a work, training and/or study program, including staff, the work environment and the workload.
The offender pay system, including evaluation methods and ratings, and the Board's decisions regarding an offender's pay level (termination of pay, a reduction in pay level, or refusal to approve a recommendation for a pay increase); procedural violations (for example, the Board's decision and reasons were not communicated to the offender in writing within the prescribed timeframe, or the offender was not given the opportunity to respond to the Board orally or in writing.)
Alleged errors in the calculation of hours of employment or in the amount remitted to an offender with respect to pay.
Leisure activities, including availability, quality, staff, policies on leisure activities, arts and crafts and other leisure issues. This includes videos, movies, games, special events, exercise and access to community television and radio programs.
Religious and spiritual programs, including any policies, procedures and institutional provisions for the free exercise of religion. This includes access to a Native Elder or other religious leader of the same faith as the offender, approval of religious diets, religious holidays, use and ownership of religious items, possession of religious literature, and alleged institutional impediments to the free practice of the offender's religion.
Social and cultural activities offered in the institutions whether organized by offender organizations or by community volunteers (for example, lifers groups and Native brotherhoods).
Core programs or program areas in the institution or in the community. This includes access to programs, their availability, staff and the quality of the programs offered. It applies particularly to programs for the acquisition of cognitive or reasoning skills, substance abuse programs, sex offender programs, family violence programs and literacy or education programs.
Decisions or procedures regarding mail or correspondence (general and privileged) and parcels; measures to check the contents of envelopes, as well as the opening or reading of letters received or sent by offenders; fair and regular access to telephones, the authorization of telephone use for humanitarian reasons, the addition of a telephone number to the list of authorized calls, the standards governing offender access to the telephone system available for their use, impediments to communicating with a member of the community in writing or by telephone.
Decisions or procedures regarding visits in general (contact visits or screened visits) and private family visits, including the approval, suspension or cancellation of visits. This category also includes the number of authorized visits, audio surveillance of conversations between offenders and visitors, and the duration and frequency of private family visits.
A penitentiary placement decision, such as the reasons for selecting a particular institution.
The denial of a transfer requested to another institution or region.
An involuntary transfer or a procedural violation.
A decision made by the National Review Board, including the Board's initial decision to place the offender in the SHU at the end of the assessment period, or a decision made during a subsequent review to keep an offender in the SHU; the offender's interview with the Board members, or the choice of destination to which the offender is moved from the SHU at the end of the assessment period or at any other time afterward.
The assignment of the initial security classification, the maintenance of the current classification or a change to the current classification, the overall assessment of the classification or the assessment of one of the three critical factors stated in the Regulations, namely, institutional adjustment, escape risk and public safety.
In all cases where a security classification is assigned or revised, the Institutional Head or delegated Deputy Warden is responsible for ensuring the offender is provided with reasons as well as the information considered in making the decision, in writing within five working days of the assignment (CD 710-6 - Review of Offender Security Classification). The Institutional Head cannot delegate the authority for authorizing an offender's security classification to the Deputy Warden in those cases where the security classification is related to a transfer decision and/or involves an offender serving a life sentence for first or second-degree murder who is currently classified as maximum security (CD 710-6 - Review of Offender Security Classification).
Inmates may use the grievance process with regard to any aspect of procedures or decisions relating to hearings for minor offences (CD 580 - Discipline of Inmates).
Inmates may not grieve those procedures or decisions relating to hearings for serious offences that are under the exclusive jurisdiction of an Independent Chairperson (CD 580 - Discipline of Inmates). An inmate may grieve issues regarding informal resolution at a hearing.
The accuracy or pertinence of the information contained in these reports.
The standards, decisions, guidelines or operational procedures for the implementation and maintenance of the urinalysis program at the institutional or community level.
The calculation or interpretation of the individual's sentence by the Chief, Sentence Management, or details pertaining to the sentence calculation sheet that must be issued to each offender.
CSC's preparation of a case for the purpose of a decision or hearing. This category encompasses case preparation for the private family visits program, transfers, the accelerated review procedure, temporary absences, work releases, perimeter work clearances, day parole, full parole, statutory release, detention reviews, judicial reviews or the prerogative of mercy (changing of a sentence/penalty); information placed in a case preparation file; and changes requested to the contents of offender files.
Decisions of the Institutional Head regarding temporary absences (escorted and unescorted) under CSC jurisdiction, work releases and perimeter work clearances.
The Correctional Plan and its contents, the deadlines for its preparation or the plan's periodic reviews - the goals and objectives identified in the plan, and the programs, resources and supervision techniques deemed necessary for their achievement.
A breach of the Official Languages Act, particularly the right to be served and to express oneself in one of Canada's two official languages (French or English) with respect to matters such as disciplinary charges, transfers and parole decisions. This category also includes interpretation services provided to an offender who understands neither of the country's two official languages.
Excessive or unjustified use of force by a staff member in the performance of duties, including the use of restraints to control an offender, as described in policy or when required.
NOTE:
Improper conduct of staff member(s), contractor(s), volunteer(s), or visitor(s), that is directed at and offensive to an offender, and that the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It comprises any objectionable act, comment or display that demeans, belittles, or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment, and any act of intimidation or threat. It includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Examples of what generally constitutes harassment:
Staff members have been careless or negligent in the performance of their duties or they have failed to conform to the regulations and/or procedures in force (in the institution or in the community).
Any verbal comment or non-verbal gesture(s) or contact of a sexual nature, whether on a one-time basis or in a continuous series of incidents, that might reasonably be expected to cause offence or humiliation. Examples include lewd or suggestive remarks, gestures or actions on the part of staff, or failure to ensure privacy during searches.
Any cross-gender staffing policy issue arising from interaction between male staff/contractors/volunteers and women offenders.
The offender believes that CSC staff actions, language or decisions were made in a discriminatory manner based on gender, race, ethnicity, language, sexual orientation, religion, age, marital status, or a physical or mental disability. This category includes staff behaviour that constitutes a violation of the offender's human rights or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Other types of personal searches (non-intrusive searches or frisk searches), or searches of items, cells, rooms or vehicles. This category includes searches using drug detecting dogs and other technologies.
Strip searches, their frequency, the decision to conduct a strip search or the way in which the strip search was conducted; strip searches that involve body cavity searches, strip searches of visitors or children, and the impact of the search on the offender.
Articles seized during searches, the return of seized items to their rightful owner, or the forfeiture of items seized pursuant to section 59 of the Regulations and requests to cancel the forfeiture of a seized article.
Anything to do with access to, or the purchase, ownership, repair, storage, sale or usage of personal effects. This category includes the personal effects that the offender had in his possession at the time of admission, as well as those received from the outside within the following 30 days; the procedures to obtain personal effects after this period; and the amount and maximum value of effects that the offender may keep as cell effects or in storage in the containers provided by the institution.
Any aspect of the management of inmate monies, including personal bank accounts, group accounts and the Inmate Welfare Fund. This category includes withdrawals from savings accounts, requests for loans from the Inmate Welfare Fund, any applicable attachments or deductions (such as mandatory contributions to the Welfare Fund, repayment of an outstanding loan, or payment of a fine imposed as a result of a disciplinary offence) and contributions to the payment of expenses incurred by the CSC for offender board and lodging.
Any aspect of canteen operations, including availability of products, choice of vendors, and hours of operation.
The denial of a claim against the Crown or the settlement offered to the claimant. This may be because of seizure, disposal or loss of the offender's personal effects, or damage to them.
Any aspect of the complaint and grievance process, including access to complaint and grievance forms, access to the process for settling complaints and grievances during labour disputes, the priority rating assigned to a complaint or grievance, measures taken against offenders who submit numerous complaints and grievances, the composition and organization of boards, tardy replies, and objectivity and fairness in the review of complaints or grievances.
The following points related to corrective actions prescribed in an offender complaint or grievance response: timeliness of corrective action; and dissatisfaction with the outcome of the corrective action.
Subject matters that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of the CSC. The most common situations are decisions made by the Independent Chairperson, charges laid before an outside court and court convictions, the judge's sentencing decisions, police action or action taken while the offender was in provincial custody, National Parole Board decisions (the Board has its own appeal system), or decisions made by an agency other than the CSC, such as legal aid or Citizenship and Immigration Canada.
A grievable subject matter that cannot be easily coded in one of the above categories. Use the "Other" category conservatively, only when there is no clear correspondence between a complaint or grievance and the categories available in the coding system.
If an offender no longer wishes to pursue a complaint/grievance through the redress process, he/she must submit a written explanation indicating how the matter was resolved. The written explanation must then be signed by the offender and the staff member involved in resolving the issue.
A complaint/grievance may be deferred when:
In all cases, when a complaint/grievance is deferred, the offender must be notified in writing and, if possible, provided the expected response date.
NOTE: When a grievance has been deferred for two years, the Grievance Coordinator will re-verify the status of the grievance with the offender to ensure that the deferral remains appropriate.
A complaint/grievance may be rejected when:
Rejection under the four categories can only occur on a case-by-case basis. Each complaint or grievance must be analyzed separately to determine if it is frivolous, vexatious, submitted in bad faith or offensive. There will be circumstances where an offender will submit a grievance containing offensive language out of a sense of urgency, frustration or other factor that makes the offensive language more understandable. In such cases, the respondent can decide to process the matter in any case. It is not permitted to label some or all complaints/grievances, submitted by an offender under one of the categories, even if it seems obvious that some or all are being submitted for such inappropriate reasons.
Nevertheless, in deciding if any given complaint/grievance is frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith, considerations may include the frequency and nature of other complaints/grievances that the grievor has been submitting.
These criteria would not be the determining factor in such a decision but they are reasonable considerations. They may indicate whether the grievor's purpose is to submit legitimate complaints/grievances or to undermine the complaint/grievance process.
A complaint/grievance is beyond authority when the decision maker establishes that the issue must be addressed at the next level (is beyond the authority of the current level to address).
After reviewing the complaint/grievance and conducting the analysis, the issue is considered unfounded or the decisions or actions of staff members were deemed appropriate.
When a complaint/grievance is justified on the grounds that the treatment of the offender, or the application of a procedure was unfair or arbitrarily applied or contrary to guiding legislation or policy.
The person responding to the complaint/grievance will determine the corrective action that would effectively respond to the upheld complaint/grievance.
It is important to differentiate between the issue raised by the offender and the corrective action requested. The grievance may be upheld but the corrective action may not necessarily be granted. For example, an offender's request to have an officer dismissed for improperly conducting a search may not be the appropriate corrective action under the circumstances. Alternatively, corrective action requiring the Institutional Head to educate staff on the correct procedures for conducting a search may be appropriate. Any corrective action required is to be undertaken by the institutional or regional authorities depending on the nature of the action required.
A complaint/grievance may be upheld in part when:
EXAMPLE: An offender grieves the decision to deny a transfer and the length of time it took to receive the decision. Upon review, the transfer denial is found to be valid, but it is also found that the required timeframes were not respected. In such a case, the grievance would be upheld in part. The response would indicate that the timeframes were not respected (therefore upheld) but the reasons for denying the transfer were appropriate (therefore denied).
A complaint/grievance requires no further action when it is deemed that the action taken at previous level(s) was done in accordance with law and policy and the issue therefore requires no further action. Though the action may not be to the offender's satisfaction, it is nonetheless deemed to have been appropriately rectified at the previous level(s).
Alternative dispute resolution (also known as informal resolution) mechanisms such as coaching, counselling, mediation, healing/resolution circles, and facilitation must be offered to the parties involved and must remain available throughout the redress process.
A healing/resolution circle is an Aboriginal cultural ceremony normally led by an Elder. There are many purposes for holding a circle depending on the circumstances and/or need at that time. The resolution of disputes, complaints or misunderstandings is one possibility. The circle could be called various names depending on the Elder and the traditions of the region.
Applicable policy: CD 702 - Aboriginal Offenders, definitions in Annex A:
Various forms of alternative dispute resolution exist to facilitate principled, interest-based resolution of problems. Some involve facilitation by a third party and some are more structured than others. Offender Redress is prepared to assist institutions in identifying and implementing alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
1) Steps for Analysing a Complaint/Grievance:
Individuals preparing responses are accountable for responses prepared. Be prepared to answer questions, and provide a rationale supported by law and policies.
2) Preparing the Response
Step 1: Read the grievance carefully to determine what is alleged by the grievor and what he/she wants. If you are not sure, contact the grievor in order to gather further information.
Step 2: Determine what information is required to complete the investigation. Obtain supporting documentation as required and refer to applicable legislation, policies, SOPs, CDs, etc. If necessary, consult the Revoked Policy Documents if the policy references have changed since the complaint/grievance has been submitted.
Step 3: Identify precedents related to the case and previous submissions by the grievor.
Step 4: Determine the accuracy and credibility of the information by evaluating the facts alleged by the grievor or stated by other persons. Conduct interviews, contact appropriate persons involved in the grievance, subject matter experts, the grievor (when applicable), etc. Include any information gathered, including interview questions and notes. Normally, if information is true, it will be supported by another source, whether it is written or verbal. Seek out information that could corroborate or contradict unsupported statements or documentation provided by the grievor or other persons.
Some examples of assessing allegations:
NOTE: Where a person has the onus of proving facts, they must show that it is more likely than not that their allegations are true. Normally, where the offender alleges some misconduct or breach of rules, the onus is on the offender to prove the allegations. At other times, the onus is on others to disprove the offender's allegations.
Some Examples of "reversed onus":
NOTE: There are numerous cases where CSC policy dictates that the recording of some information is proof of the information. In such cases, the onus becomes to disprove this information (e.g. Information on a signed Personal Property Record is presumed accurate unless it can be proven otherwise).
Step 5: Analyze all relevant information. Determine whether the grievor's allegations are valid based on gathered evidence and/or supporting documentation. Evidence (video, audio, logbooks, etc.) and supporting documentation must be kept on file with the complaint/grievance so that it can be transmitted to the next level when applicable.
Step 6: Record your findings and set out your response as follows:
Prepare a response that is impartial, clear, complete, accurate, timely and fair. The text of the response must reflect these qualities.
A) Criteria for Clear, Complete & Accurate Responses
The response must identify the assertions (arguments, contentions) that the grievor is making. It must set out the issue(s) and the specific question(s) raised by the submission. It must then identify:
B) Impartiality of Responses
The text of the response must demonstrate that the relevant statements, allegations and points of view of all persons who contributed to the investigation are provided without bias, preconceptions, undue assumptions, "editorial slant" or other improper considerations on the part of the investigator.
The impression of impartiality is created by:
C) Responses That Are Fair
| Subject matter | Means of redress |
|---|---|
| Matters relating to the Privacy Act (e.g., delays, exemptions, and completeness of documents) | Privacy Commissioner of Canada 112 Kent Street Place de Ville Tower B, 3rd Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1H3 Phone: 613-995-8210 or 1-800-282-1376 |
| Matters relating to the Access to Information Act | Information Commissioner of Canada 112 Kent Street Place de Ville Tower B, 3rd Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1H3 Phone: 613-995-2410 or 1-800-267-0441 |
| Content of files accessed under subsection 12(2) of the Privacy Act | Director, Access to Information and Privacy 340 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, Ontario K1A OP9 |
| Complaints relating to the Official Languages Act (These complaints may be addressed through the offender complaint and grievance process, or sent to the Commissioner of Official Languages.) | Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages 344 Slater Street, 3rd Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0T8 Phone: 613-996-6368 or 1-877-996-6368 |
| Matters under the jurisdiction of the provinces | Provincial authorities (as applicable) |
| Matters under the jurisdiction of agencies such as the National Parole Board | Agency (as applicable) |
| Matters relating to the Correctional Investigator and staff | Office of the Correctional Investigator P.O. Box 3421, Station "D" Ottawa, Ontario K1P 6L4 Phone: 613-990-2692 or 1-877-885-8848 |
| Matters relating to claims against the Crown for the loss of personal effects | Must file a claim against the Crown. The decision regarding that claim is grievable. |
| Matters relating to compensation for work injuries | Federal Workers' Compensation Service Human Resources and Skills Development Canada Phone: 819-953-8001 |
| Matters relating to convictions and sentencing by the Courts | Appeal process through the courts |
| Matters relating to the administration of justice including courts and police forces | Responsible court or police agency or responsible level of government |
| Matters relating to the treatment provided by non-CSC agencies or organizations (e.g., outside hospitals) | The agency or the government ultimately in charge of the agency |
| Decisions of the Independent Chairperson | Federal Court – Administrative procedures leading to the hearing may be grieved. Decisions of minor court may be grieved. |