What happened
A civil engineer supervising a road project alleged discriminatory harassment by a site foreman employed by a different contractor. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal concluded that the complaint could fall within the Code’s employment prohibition.
What the Court decided
In **British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal v. Schrenk, 2017 SCC 62**, the Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The protection is not limited to conduct by an employer or supervisor. The focus is adverse impact and its connection to employment, not only the harasser’s formal authority. A co-worker employed by another organization can be covered where the connection is sufficient.
The Court decided jurisdiction, not the final merits of the allegations.
Binder HR analysis
Contractors, consultants and overlapping supervision are normal features of modern workplaces. Shared sites need clear protocols for receiving, investigating and escalating complaints; imposing interim measures; moving records between organizations; and communicating with affected workers.
Contract language can allocate tasks, but it should not become a reason for delay. Training and reporting channels should expressly cover personnel employed by other organizations.
Source: Supreme Court of Canada, **2017 SCC 62**. General information only.