A BC employer investigated a racial discrimination complaint, disciplined the supervisor and directed workplace training. The BC Human Rights Tribunal still refused to dismiss the complaint in Sandhu v. BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and another, 2026 BCHRT 200. The ruling is a reminder that the steps taken against an accused employee don't necessarily resolve the harm alleged by the person who complained.
Harminder Sandhu, a communications technician, alleged that his supervisor made offensive comments about race, his turban and Indigenous spiritual practices, including in a group work email. He said those events contributed to a poisoned work environment. The Ministry conducted an investigation and ultimately suspended the supervisor for two days and required additional training. It argued that this response, and the weaknesses it perceived in the evidence, justified dismissing the human rights complaint without a hearing.
The Tribunal disagreed. Several contested events involved significant credibility disputes that couldn't fairly be determined at this preliminary stage. It also considered that racial discrimination can depend on context and the cumulative effect of incidents. A comment made to a third party may still affect an employee, and even an apparently isolated workplace email can contribute to a wider discriminatory environment.
Although the Tribunal acknowledged that the Ministry took the allegations seriously and investigated them, it wasn't satisfied that the responses addressed their alleged impact on Sandhu. There was no evidence of an apology by the supervisor and little to demonstrate steps directed at the complainant's experience. Investigation and discipline were relevant, but they were not a complete answer.
That is the practical distinction employers should take from the decision. Identifying misconduct, correcting behaviour and supporting the person who experienced it aren't interchangeable tasks. Where a complaint suggests a continuing impact, the response needs to consider that impact rather than focusing exclusively on whether the alleged wrongdoer received consequences.
Both applications to dismiss were denied, and the matter will proceed to a hearing. The Tribunal made no finding that discrimination actually occurred.