An employer should consider hiring an external workplace investigator when a complaint cannot be investigated fairly, independently, or effectively by someone within the organization. This is especially important when allegations involve senior leadership, conflicts of interest, repeated complaints, discrimination, or serious workplace misconduct.
Ontario law does not require an external investigator for every complaint. However, employers must ensure that workplace harassment incidents and complaints are investigated appropriately under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).
The decision is not simply about outsourcing an uncomfortable conversation. It is about choosing a process that can establish the facts, treat the people involved fairly, and support an appropriate response.
Does Ontario Law Require an External Workplace Investigator?
Not in every case. Under section 32.0.7 of Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act, employers must ensure an investigation appropriate to the circumstances is conducted into incidents and complaints of workplace harassment.
An investigation may be conducted internally by a qualified HR professional, manager, or other appropriate person. Alternatively, the employer may retain an external workplace investigator, such as a lawyer, HR professional, or licensed private investigator.
Ontario’s guidance emphasizes four characteristics of an appropriate workplace harassment investigation:
- Prompt: The employer responds without unnecessary delay.
- Objective: The investigator approaches the allegations without prejudging the outcome.
- Confidential: Information is disclosed only as necessary for the investigation, corrective action, worker protection, or legal requirements.
- Thorough: Relevant people are interviewed, available evidence is considered, and findings are supported by the information collected.
The investigator must not be directly involved in the complaint or under the direct control of the alleged harasser. Employers should also know that a Ministry of Labour inspector can order an investigation by an impartial person with specified qualifications or experience under section 55.3 of the OHSA. The employer must pay for that investigation and obtain a written report.
The main question is not whether an internal investigation is cheaper or more convenient. It is whether the organization can conduct an appropriate investigation with the people and resources available.
When Should an Employer Hire an External Workplace Investigator?
Certain situations make an independent investigation particularly valuable.
1. The Complaint Involves Senior Leadership
Allegations involving an owner, executive, senior manager, or someone who oversees HR can create an immediate concern about independence. For example, an HR manager may be experienced in handling employee complaints but report directly to the executive accused of misconduct.
Even if that HR manager intends to be impartial, the reporting relationship may make it difficult to conduct an investigation free from actual or perceived influence. An external workplace investigator operates outside the organization’s regular management structure, making it easier to establish an independent fact finding process.
Ontario’s workplace harassment guidance specifically identifies allegations involving an employer or senior leader as circumstances where a third party investigation may be appropriate.
2. There Is a Conflict of Interest
A conflict can arise when the person assigned to investigate has a personal or professional connection to the complaint.
Examples include:
- An HR employee who previously advised one of the parties about the same allegations
- A manager whose own conduct or decisions are being questioned
- Someone who witnessed the incident and may need to provide evidence
- An investigator who reports directly to the person accused
The concern is not limited to deliberate bias. A person may genuinely believe they can remain neutral while having a relationship that reasonably calls their independence into question. Before assigning an internal investigator, employers should consider whether the person can evaluate all available evidence and make findings without conflicting responsibilities or inappropriate influence.
3. There Are Multiple Complaints or Concerns About Previous Investigations
An external investigator may be appropriate when several employees raise related allegations or when earlier complaints were handled without resolving the underlying concerns. Repeated complaints may raise questions about whether the organization previously recognized a pattern of behaviour or responded adequately.
An independent investigator can help establish a clear scope, examine relevant prior incidents, and distinguish separate allegations from connected patterns of conduct. That does not mean every complaint must be combined into one investigation. The appropriate approach depends on the allegations, the people involved, and procedural fairness.
4. The Allegations Are Particularly Sensitive or Complex
Some workplace complaints require specialized investigative experience.
Examples may include:
- Sexual harassment or serious discriminatory conduct
- Allegations involving abuse of authority
- Conflicting witness accounts and limited documentary evidence
- Complaints involving multiple departments or locations
- Allegations that overlap with human rights or other legal proceedings
These cases often require careful interviewing, credibility assessment, documentation, and consideration of the relevant legal and workplace policy requirements. A qualified external investigator may be better positioned to manage those demands where the internal team lacks the necessary experience.
5. The Organization Cannot Conduct a Timely, Independent Investigation Internally
Smaller organizations may not have a dedicated HR department. Larger organizations may have HR professionals who are already involved in the underlying dispute or do not have capacity to manage a complex investigation.
An external investigator can provide a defined process without relying on employees who have competing responsibilities. However, an external investigation is not automatically better simply because it is external. The investigator must still have the appropriate skills, independence, and understanding of the issues.
Internal vs. External Workplace Investigations: How Should Employers Decide?
The following comparison can help employers assess which approach may be appropriate.
| Workplace situation | Approach to consider |
| A complaint between employees, with a qualified and impartial HR investigator available | Internal investigation may be appropriate |
| An allegation against the employee responsible for investigating complaints | Consider an independent investigator |
| A complaint involving an owner, executive, or senior leader who oversees HR | External investigation may be strongly advisable |
| Multiple related complaints or concerns about previous investigations | Consider external fact-finding |
| A complex harassment or discrimination complaint requiring specialized expertise | Assess whether a qualified external investigator is needed |
| A routine performance disagreement with no apparent harassment allegation | Assess the issue before deciding whether a formal investigation is required |
These are practical considerations, not automatic legal rules.
A workplace issue may require attention without necessarily requiring a full external investigation. However, where an employer becomes aware of a potential workplace harassment incident, it must consider its investigative obligations even if no formal written complaint has been submitted.
What Does an External Workplace Investigation Involve?
An external workplace investigation is a structured fact-finding process. Its purpose is to establish what happened based on the available evidence, rather than simply confirm the complainant’s or employer’s position. Although the details vary, the process generally involves five stages.
1. Initial Assessment and Scope
The employer and investigator identify the allegations, relevant policies, applicable legal requirements, and questions that need to be answered.
A clearly defined mandate helps prevent the investigation from becoming unnecessarily broad or overlooking important issues. Employers should also consider whether any immediate measures are needed to protect workers or preserve evidence while the investigation proceeds.
2. Evidence Collection
The investigator reviews relevant materials, which may include emails, messages, policies, personnel documents, schedules, or other records connected to the allegations. The objective is to gather evidence relevant to the issues under investigation, not to collect every available workplace record.
3. Interviews and Fact-Finding
The investigator interviews the complainant, the person responding to the allegations, and relevant witnesses. The respondent should have a meaningful opportunity to understand and respond to the specific allegations being investigated.
Where accounts differ, the investigator assesses the reliability of the available evidence without assuming that either party is automatically correct.
4. Findings and Reporting
The investigator evaluates the evidence and prepares findings within the agreed scope. A written report may explain the allegations, investigation steps, evidence considered, credibility assessments, and conclusions.
The investigator’s role is generally to determine the facts. Decisions about discipline, workplace measures, and other responses ordinarily remain with the employer unless a different role has been expressly and appropriately established.
5. Communication and Corrective Action
For workplace harassment investigations under Ontario’s OHSA, the employer must ensure that the worker who allegedly experienced harassment and the alleged harasser, if employed by the organization, receive written information about the investigation’s results and any corrective action taken or planned.
The employer must also consider what steps are necessary to address the findings and prevent further problems. Rogers & Company’s workplace investigation services support organizations with independent fact-finding involving harassment, discrimination, misconduct, and other sensitive workplace allegations.
How Long Does a Workplace Harassment Investigation Take in Ontario?
Ontario’s Ministry of Labour guidance recommends that workplace harassment investigations be completed promptly, ideally within 90 days or less, unless compelling circumstances justify a longer period.
This is a guideline, not an absolute statutory deadline applying to every investigation. The timeline depends on factors such as the number of allegations, witnesses, available records, complexity of the evidence, and whether key participants are available.
Employers should not rush an investigation to meet an arbitrary deadline. Equally, the process should not be allowed to drift without a clear reason. When hiring an external investigator, it is useful to establish an expected timeline, key milestones, and how delays will be communicated.
For more background on how investigations are conducted, see Rogers & Company’s guide to workplace investigations in Ontario, including employee rights, timelines, and confidentiality.
What Should Employers Look for When Hiring an External Workplace Investigator?
Choosing the right investigator involves more than reviewing credentials or comparing fees. Employers should consider whether the investigator has:
- Relevant experience: Knowledge of workplace harassment investigations, applicable legislation, and employment related disputes.
- Independence: No conflict that could compromise the investigation or reasonably undermine confidence in it.
- Investigative skills: Experience interviewing witnesses, assessing credibility, reviewing evidence, and preparing factual findings.
- A clear process: An understandable approach to confidentiality, communication, timing, and reporting.
- An appropriate scope and fee arrangement: Clarity about what is included, expected deliverables, and how additional work will be handled.
Employers should also confirm whether the investigator requires any professional licence for the services being provided. Ontario does not impose a universal investigation licence requirement through the OHSA itself, but other licensing rules may apply depending on the investigator’s work.
Does the Investigator Have to Be a Lawyer?
No. Ontario guidance recognizes that an external workplace investigator may be a lawyer, qualified HR professional, licensed private investigator, or another suitable professional. A lawyer is particularly useful when the investigation involves overlapping employment law, human rights, or complex contractual issues.
However, retaining a lawyer does not automatically make an investigation report privileged or eliminate the employer’s statutory duties. Questions about confidentiality, legal privilege, and the investigator’s mandate should be addressed at the outset.
What Should Employers Avoid When Responding to a Workplace Complaint?
A fair investigation can be undermined before the first interview if the employer makes decisions too quickly. Three common mistakes deserve attention.
Assuming a formal complaint is required. An employer may become aware of potential harassment through a supervisor, witness, or another source. The duty to ensure an appropriate investigation is not limited to signed written complaints.
Choosing an investigator based only on convenience. Assigning the matter to the closest available manager may create difficulties if that person is involved in the allegations or lacks the necessary independence.
Making disciplinary decisions before gathering the facts. Interim safety or workplace measures may be necessary, but employers should avoid treating allegations as proven before conducting an appropriate process.
Where workplace violence, an immediate safety risk, or potentially criminal conduct is involved, additional protective and reporting obligations may arise. An ordinary harassment investigation should not delay necessary safety measures.
The objective is to respond proportionately, preserve evidence, and establish a process appropriate to the specific circumstances.
Need an Independent Workplace Investigator in Ontario?
Not every workplace complaint requires an external investigator. But when independence, impartiality, or investigative experience is in question, bringing in qualified third-party support may be the appropriate next step.
Rogers & Company provides independent workplace investigation services for organizations throughout Ontario, including Oakville, Halton, Peel, Toronto, and the GTA. The team handles sensitive allegations involving harassment, discrimination, misconduct, and workplace policy concerns.
If your organization is facing a workplace complaint and you’re unsure whether an internal investigation is appropriate, contact Rogers & Company to discuss the allegations and determine the next steps.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does an Employee Have the Right to Choose the Workplace Investigator?
Ontario’s OHSA does not generally give employees an unrestricted right to choose who investigates a workplace harassment complaint. The employer must ensure the investigation is appropriate and impartial. Collective agreements or other applicable procedures may impose additional requirements.
Does an Employer Have to Give Employees the Full Investigation Report?
Not necessarily. Under Ontario’s OHSA, the employer must provide the required parties with written results of the investigation and information about corrective action taken or planned.
The written results are distinct from the full investigation report, which may contain sensitive personal information and witness evidence. Other legal obligations may affect disclosure in particular circumstances.
Do Federally Regulated Employers Follow the Same Rules?
Not always. Federally regulated workplaces are subject to the Canada Labour Code and its Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations, which establish different procedures, including specific rules for selecting investigators. Employers should confirm which legal framework applies before starting the process.