In workplace investigations, a written complaint often initiates the process. But what if the complainant chooses not to participate further – declining interviews, refusing to clarify, or remaining silent?

This creates a challenge. Assessing the credibility of the allegations or understanding the impact of the alleged conduct without the complainant’s voice. Even without participation, a written complaint can be evaluated for credibility and reliability to support reasonable fact-finding. However, written accounts often lack critical elements that help assess the full picture.

1. Understanding the Missing Pieces

- Individual Impact. Without the complainant’s input, it’s difficult to understand how the alleged conduct affected them emotionally or psychologically. Their perception of severity, feelings of distress, or whether they sought support (e.g., therapy, leave) are key to assessing harm.

- Functional Impact. Misconduct often affects workplace performance and relationships. A complainant’s silence makes it harder to determine if their productivity declined, if they withdrew from colleagues, or if they disengaged from their role.

- Duration and Frequency. Participation helps clarify whether the impact was isolated or ongoing. Repeated incidents may have a cumulative effect, but without direct input, it’s difficult to assess whether the harm persists or has resolved.

- Contextual Vulnerabilities. Power dynamics and personal or cultural factors can intensify the impact of certain behaviors. A junior employee, for example, may experience greater harm from a senior colleague’s actions. These nuances are often lost without the complainant’s perspective.

- Remedy and Resolution. Understanding what the complainant hopes to achieve – whether accountability, policy change, or restorative action – is essential for resolution. Their willingness to engage in the process also shapes the path forward.

2. War Story

During an investigation, the impacted employee expressed that she did not wish to “take this further,” referring to the investigation, explaining that it was “really stressing me out and distracting me to do my job knowing I didn’t brought up (sic) the complaint nor I want to do anything about it” (sic). Despite her decision not to participate, the employer proceeded with the investigation. Ultimately, the respondents were found to have engaged in sexual harassment, in violation of the organization’s Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Policy. This matter advanced through several legal stages - first to arbitration, then to judicial review, and ultimately to the Court of Appeal. It is now awaiting a fresh decision from a newly appointed arbitrator.

3. Proceeding with Caution and Fairness

When a complainant remains silent, investigators must proceed carefully. A written complaint can still be assessed, but its limitations must be acknowledged. Using a structured framework, documenting efforts to engage the complainant, and ensuring fairness to all parties are essential.

Ultimately, the goal is to reach a defensible conclusion that supports workplace improvement and a reasonable investigation process and outcome - even when one voice is missing.