The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has determined that a former chief of Alexander First Nation subjected an employee to sexual harassment spanning a nine-year duration. Kurt Burnstick, the ex-chief of the First Nation situated approximately 55 kilometers northwest of Edmonton, had previously been cleared of criminal charges in 2017 related to his interactions with the complainant.
In a ruling issued on July 31, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal concluded that Burnstick had engaged in actions that qualify as the discriminatory practice of sexual harassment. The former employee lodged two separate complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 2016, which were subsequently merged into a single inquiry by the tribunal in September 2018.
One complaint was directed at Alexander First Nation, while the other specifically named Burnstick as the individual respondent. The grievance against Alexander First Nation was resolved and approved by the commission in January 2021, whereas the complaint against Burnstick proceeded to a hearing.
As per the decision, the woman alleged that Burnstick, who served as a band councillor and later as chief during the period in question, sexually harassed her. The incidents reportedly began in 2006, with the woman claiming that Burnstick engaged in flirtatious and sexual behavior, which she interpreted as an attempt to initiate a romantic relationship with her.
The alleged behaviors included unsolicited physical contact, such as a non-consensual kiss at a Calgary pub, as well as repeated instances of Burnstick bumping into her with his stomach. The woman also detailed repeated inquiries about her personal availability outside of work, disturbing conduct like dismissing his recent marriage as a hindrance to their interactions, and offers of financial aid or extra work in situations that could lead to private encounters.
The woman further stated that Burnstick frequently invited her to out-of-town meetings with implications of relaxation and fun, sometimes suggesting that she wouldn’t have to reimburse money he had provided if she agreed to travel with him. She also claimed that she was compelled to collect pay from Burnstick directly on multiple occasions, often in private settings.
The decision highlighted that the alleged harassment escalated after Burnstick was elected chief in 2014. The woman estimated between 50 and 100 incidents of unwanted touching and “belly bumping” between 2006 and 2015. The culmination of the harassment, as per the woman, occurred during an incident at the First Nation’s office on October 28, 2015.
Following the incident, the woman promptly reported the matter to her supervisor, refraining from confronting the chief out of fear for her job security. Burnstick disputed the woman’s version of events, claiming the interaction was limited to a consensual hug. However, the tribunal sided with the woman’s testimony, deeming her a credible witness.
Tribunal member Kathryn Raymond attributed the case’s outcome to the woman’s credibility, emphasizing that the decision was based on a balance of probabilities rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt required in criminal cases. Raymond found Burnstick to be dismissive and uncooperative during the hearing but based her assessment on his testimony and evidence from other witnesses that supported parts of the woman’s account.
Raymond concluded that Burnstick’s behavior was unwelcome, persistent, and had a negative impact on the former employee’s work environment, citing a significant power imbalance between Burnstick, a political leader in the First Nation, and the woman. Despite substantiating the complaint, Raymond did not mandate Burnstick to provide additional compensation to the complainant, pointing out that the Canadian Human Rights Act treats acts of an employee in the course of employment as acts of the employer.
Since Alexander First Nation had already settled with the woman, Raymond stated that there was no statutory authority to compel Burnstick to personally pay additional compensation. The woman had received compensation through the settlement with Alexander First Nation, though Raymond clarified that a settlement does not necessarily imply an admission of liability or wrongdoing.