Keith Fraser (Vancouver Province) – A Surrey RCMP officer is suing the B.C. solicitor-general’s ministry, the Attorney-General of Canada and three RCMP officers, alleging she was harassed, demeaned and belittled by bosses who operated in an atmosphere of “fear and control.”
Elisabeth Mary Couture says her problems began in May 2009 when she was promoted to corporal and appointed to work in the Surrey detachment’s branch of the Drugs and Organized Crime Awareness Service (DOCAS).
In a notice of civil claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Couture says she was told that contact between co-workers was “highly discouraged” and that all conversations among co-workers had to be approved in advance.
She says she was questioned about her personal and social consumption of alcohol and informed that members of the management team abstain from alcohol socially and wish others to do the same.
Couture says she was warned against “rumour-mongering” and told not to contact two DOCAS colleagues she knew from previous work for the RCMP.
In September 2009, while receiving field training, Couture overheard an officer speaking with his daughter on the telephone, with the daughter referring to Couture as the “crazy lady,” she says.
The officer then phoned a superior officer on the speaker phone to advise him of the incident and the superior officer laughed and said Couture should be nicknamed “CB” for “Crazy Beth,” she added.
“Couture was very offended and insisted that such talk cease,” says the lawsuit.
In the same month, while on the phone with a co-worker, a superior officer overheard the call and confronted her, motioning across her throat to “cut off” the call, says Couture in the suit.
“Members of the management team continually told Couture that she should focus solely on work and not gossip or “chit chat” with others in DOCAS, including directing Couture to refrain from extended morning greeting talk except for basic hellos upon arriving at the office,” it says.
“During Couture’s previous postings with the RCMP, she had no forced restrictions on her interactions with colleagues.”
In May 2010 she was told that she was “too wordy” and that she must communicate with her superior in one minute or less, despite a performance appraisal indicating her communications were excellent, she says.
Throughout her tenure at DOCAS, but increasingly after May 2010, two of her superiors began to eavesdrop on her telephone conversations and comment on the length or content of the calls, Couture says.
When she tried to privately contact her colleagues for support in dealing with the problems, her calls came to the attention of management and she was told she was being watched, she says.
She was no longer confided in by management and “began to feel fear of reprisal,” she says.
Couture began to suffer “almost daily” symptoms of anxiety and panic upon arriving at work, including heart palpitations, sweating and clammy hands.
In September 2010, while attending a workshop for the entire DOCAS team, she whispered a question to a colleague but was immediately chastised by a superior officer, who yelled her name loudly and harshly, embarrassing her in front of her colleagues.
Shortly afterwards she experienced a panic attack and high anxiety on the way to work and went off duty sick. She remains off work.
The surveillance of her emails and business cellular phone contributed to an atmosphere of “fear and control,” she alleges.
“The defendants breached their duty to Couture by harassing, demeaning and belittling her, micro-managing her work and restricting her free speech.”
Couture claims she attempted to seek remedies through an internal RCMP harassment policy but that the remedies available are “very limited.”
“Complaints cannot receive compensation for losses due to mental suffering under the policy.”
She is seeking unspecified general, special, punitive and aggravated damages.
Reached by phone Monday, she declined to comment further on the allegations contained in the lawsuit.
Named as defendants are the B.C. solicitor-general’s ministry, the Attorney-General of Canada and three named RCMP officers: Anthony Choy; Sharon Cooke; and Bob Hall.
RCMP spokeswoman Cpl. Annie Linteau said she was not aware of the case and added that the RCMP don’t usually comment on lawsuits.
No statement of defence has been filed. A notice of civil claim contains allegations that have not been proven in court.
[Source]
All Paulson has to do is say “We have a harassment problem, and I’m gonna fix it. Nobody is immune to accountability”….
And then he actually has to follow through on it.
I hope Canadians are getting tired of the same old “We’ll investigate this, and then forget about it” song and dance.
The RCMP must really think Canadians are dull and slow.
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
8
Quite so JohhnyG. Although most courses in harassment teach that it is in the eye of the victim as to whether or not the behavior is oppressive, one has to take into account the points that you mention. Anybody who has worked in an organization with numerous employees knows of which you speak.
Some common sense must prevail, and thus I see the recent figures of 126 complaints of harassment, with only 31 being founded and 10 still being examined as proof of your observations. Out of 31,000 employees, the numbers dispel the absurd claims being made by some of the talking heads. Although the publicity, they probably feel, will help their monetary aspirations.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
9
There is one aspect to this harassment phenomena I want to touch on, and it is that men sexually harassing women may grab the best headlines, but some of the worst harassment can be woman on woman.
It’s important to remember that it is not just the big bad men doing this. Women may not be saying things of a sexual nature to other women, or looking to bed them, but I have seen things that are much more vicious and malicious from other women, than many of the kinds of things being discussed with the men. But, this is usually not weighted as heavily and is written off as a “personality conflict’ or “peer pressure”.
Another concern I have is the topic of context. I have seen instances (not necessarily in the force) where one person is allowed to joke with a given female on a sexual nature in front of others, yet she will complain about someone else for saying something far less worse. So, in investigating these kinds of issues, it is always important to establish timelines, as well as what kinds of precedents have been set.
Talking about this reminds me of a funny story I heard once. A female had been transferred after she laid harassment complaints against half the office. At her new detachment, she confided in another female, that she couldn’t figure out why none of the men ever complimented her…. So it is important to also examine the source of these types of complaints.
I guess what I am trying to say is that you have to strike a balance. On one hand, people can’t be sooo over sensitive that every little thing they hear puts them into a near panic attack and they look to complain against everyone for everything. It will be a sad sorry state if things ever come to this. But, there has to be zero tolerance for malicious behavior. I wouldn’t want to see a system where someone is hung out to dry for a comment that was overheard by the wrong person, but at the same time harassment can be very, very subtle where the aggressors work within the frame work of the grey area’s to make someones life hell, which is difficult to prove. I think the overall intent of the behavior has to be weighted heavily, as well as someone educated in the science of workplace bulling and mobbing who can see these camouflaged forensic patterns to it. The people who lower morale and spread this type of dysfunction need to be harshly dealt with.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
6
Another instance at or over the 20 year mark. I suspect a trend.
“Couture claims she attempted to seek remedies through an internal RCMP harassment policy but that the remedies available are “very limited.”
“Complaints cannot receive compensation for losses due to mental suffering under the policy.””
So as I read this, she feels money would assuage her concerns, but it is not available in the current policy.
The noted complaints do not seem to be out of line with a lot of organizations policies on public interaction, drinking, and use of company equipment.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
13
I hope Commissioner Paulson will not only acknowledge that we in the RCMP have a harassment dilemma, but also take action. This won’t get fixed on it’s own, and left unchecked it will only get worse. If you can imagine that!
Commissioner Paulson, your legacy will be determined on how you handle this crisis.
As a male in this outfit of over 20 years, I take my hat off to the ladies who have come forward. There seems to be a lot of bull pen discussions surrounding this very topic, along with an unfortunate amount of mud slinging. I, like everyone else has their opinion, but lets not hang our members for coming forward. My motto has always been; police the way you wish to be policed. And before you start to speak badly or make light of these ladies (our members), remind yourself how you would act if this was your wife, you sister or your daughter on the receiving end of these unwelcomed comments and remarks.
Instead of waiting for change and being a part of the problem, lets all demand change and become a part of the solution. We cannot move forward as an organization until this black eye is healed. If we continue to bury this problem, which traditionally has been the case, it will only comeback and bite us twice as hard.
Commissioner Paulson this is your first test, would you like me to put a diary date on that for you.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
30 
11