Ruling clears way for hearing into alleged sexual harassment

Comments about a co-worker wearing a “little black skirt” may constitute sexual harassment in the workplace, says the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal.

A preliminary ruling on Oct. 31 clears the way for a full tribunal hearing into a case of alleged sexual harassment at Island Timberframe Ltd. in Cumberland on Vancouver Island.

The complaint, brought by former employee Dawn Schroeder, alleges inappropriate remarks were made by a male co-worker dating back to October 2011.

Schroeder said that co-worker Ed Gavigan commented about her wearing a “little black skirt” and a “schoolgirl costume.”

She said she saw Asian women displayed in suggestive situations on his workplace computer.

Schroeder told Human Rights chair Bernd Walter that she sought therapy after experiencing anxiety attacks due to the “poisoned environment” at work.

Her employers characterized the dispute as a “personality conflict,” she said, and expressed concern that Gavigan was a valuable employee who might quit.

The company said it gave him a warning and reprimand, and told him to work from home during a “cooling off” period.

The preliminary hearing, which determined there was substance to Schroeder’s claim, heard from Gavigan as well.

He admitted remarking on a “little black skirt” but he denied ever having sexual thoughts about Schroeder.

The “schoolgirl costume” was a Halloween suggestion, Gavigan said.

He admitted corresponding on an Asian “pen pal” dating site, but denied displaying any nudity.

He said Schroeder unleashed a violent verbal tirade against him on May 4, but his boss was “too busy” to deal with him.

Schroeder hired a lawyer and threatened to go to Human Rights in May, and was dismissed several weeks later. The company said it needed to cut costs.

Walter has ruled that the comments may constitute sexual harassment, which was defined as “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.”

But he made no ruling on the “merits” of the allegations, which he said would have to be subjected to a full evidence-based hearing.

He said the hearing will occur if the respective parties are unable to settle their complaint “without the acrimony and expense” of a full hearing.