The Juggling Act: Balancing Competing Workplace Obligations

Employers often face workplace investigations arising from employee complaints and privacy issues simultaneously. Navigating these overlapping obligations means prioritizing options, protecting employee rights and making practical decisions that minimize legal and reputational risk.

Below are key considerations for employers managing these competing obligations.

1. Accommodation Process. Employers must consider accommodation for protected characteristics under human rights legislation, including disability, religion and family status. Because part of the duty is process-driven, employers should respond promptly, seek relevant information, consider reasonable accommodation options and maintain an ongoing dialogue with the employee. For disability-related requests, employers should seek only reasonably necessary medical information to assess the accommodation.
2. Parallel Processes. In cases where a request for accommodation overlaps with an accusation of misconduct involving the same employee, employers may need to advance both processes simultaneously. The misconduct does not relieve the employer of its responsibility to respond to the accommodation request, and a pending investigation should not halt the accommodation process. Ideally, the employer should assign different individuals or teams to each process and carefully control the flow of information.
3. Investigation Process. Employers should address workplace complaints within reasonable timelines and follow established investigation procedures. This includes appointing an investigator. Employers should also consider the scope of the investigation and, where necessary, use interim measures to protect employees and preserve the integrity of the process without imposing punitive consequences.
4. Privacy and Fairness. An investigation requires a balance between procedural fairness and privacy. For example, a respondent to an accusation should receive enough information to address allegations, but should not receive unrestricted access to all investigative materials. In addition, employees have the right to retain some level of privacy, including communications stored on company-owned devices. Where appropriate, targeted searches for legitimate investigative purposes are preferred over reviewing all information on electronic devices, and access to sensitive information should be limited to a need-to-know basis.
5. Practical Safeguards. Employers can better manage overlapping obligations by establishing strong policies, clear escalation procedures and effective training. Because legal requirements vary across Canadian jurisdictions, employers should also consider the legislation that applies to each situation and seek legal advice where appropriate.

For permission to reprint articles, please contact the bulletin@blakes.com Marketing Department.

© 2026 Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.