A former member of the Parole Board of Canada breached government codes of conduct by making “unwanted advances” toward female employees, Canada’s public sector integrity commissioner has ruled.
In a report tabled in Parliament Tuesday, Commissioner Harriet Solloway said that the Parole Board committed gross mismanagement and endangered the health and safety of employees when it failed to respond to and document reports of Michael Sanford’s misconduct.
“Evidence obtained during our investigation shows that over a period of approximately eight years, Mr. Sanford repeatedly made unwanted advances towards female employees, including touching, inappropriate comments and unsolicited phone calls and text messages,” Solloway wrote.
“Evidence also shows that Parole Board of Canada management did not take adequate action to stop or document Mr. Sanford’s behaviour in 2015. In fact, he was reappointed for a second term as a Board Member in 2020 and subsequently behaved inappropriately towards at least two other female employees.”
Sanford was first appointed as a full-time member of the parole board in March 2014 by then Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney. At the time of his appointment to the Ontario regional office in Kingston, he was listed as an inspector with Ottawa’s police service.
He was reappointed in March 2020 for five years by then Public Safety Minister Bill Blair.
He resigned in 2022 after then Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino agreed to hold a judicial inquiry into Sanford’s behaviour on the recommendation of the board’s chairperson Jennifer Oades, who invoked a section of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA).
“This provision in the CCRA is the only mechanism available to exercise discipline, suspend without pay or remove from office a Parole Board of Canada Board member,” Oades wrote in her response to Solloway’s report. “The Minister agreed to launch this inquiry on April 25, 2022, and when notified about this decision, Mr. Sandford resigned.”
CBC News has not yet been able to reach Sanford for comment.
Solloway’s report says the first incidents her office investigated dated back to 2014 and 2015, when an employee reported that Sanford flirted with her, pressed his thighs against hers and put his hands on her shoulders and arms. Her report says that in 2015, while planning upcoming official travel, Sanford suggested he and the employee reserve rooms in a hotel separate from other officials and have a private dinner, then sent her a link to a song about having an affair.
Parole Board management intervened and the behaviour toward the employee stopped, the report says.
In 2019, says the report, an incident occurred with another employee where he sang a romantic song and kissed her on the lips during a holiday lunch. The incident wasn’t reported to Parole Board management.
In 2020, says the report, a third employee reported inappropriate behaviour by Sanford.
Employee went on sick leave due to stress: report
“Events escalated when she received a series of text messages in which he asked whether she would like a photo of him, and stated he was ‘lonely’ and ‘horny,'” Solloway wrote. “Employee C responded ‘what??? This conversation is DONE!’ but Mr. Sanford continued to message her and even called her late that night.”
After she reported the incident to her manager, says the report, Sanford was told to avoid the Parole Board office unless it was absolutely necessary to be there, but he began returning to the office. The report says the employee ended up on sick leave for several weeks as a result of distress over the incidents.
The report says incidents involving a fourth employee took place in 2021 and 2022. It says they included Sanford asking the employee for dates, putting his hands on her shoulders while she was working at her desk and “making specific and lewd comments” about her body.
In January 2022, says the report, the employee hid in a washroom to avoid Sanford and filed a formal harassment complaint.
Solloway said misconduct of a sexual nature has to be taken seriously.
“Mr. Sanford’s behaviour undoubtedly represents a significant departure from generally accepted practices; indeed, it could constitute sexual harassment,” she wrote. “Mr. Sanford occupied a position with a high level of seniority and trust within the organization, his behaviour had a severe negative impact on several employees, and he continued to behave inappropriately over a period of approximately eight years.”
The Parole Board had an obligation to create a safe work environment for employees and the measures put in place to deal with his behaviour were “insufficient and ineffective,” says the report.
“Moreover, Parole Board of Canada management trivialized Mr. Sanford’s misconduct by advising him to ‘refrain from being too friendly with the public servants,’ thus diluting any attempts to convey that his conduct was completely unacceptable and not to be repeated,” Solloway wrote.
Solloway recommended that the board implement a process to assess past workplace behaviour of prospective board members, establish procedures to deal with harassment in the workplace and ensure that employees are protected. She also recommended the Parole Board conduct a management review of its Ontario Regional Office in Kingston.
Marie-Lynne Robineau, communications adviser for the Parole Board, said the board’s management will heed Solloway’s recommendations.
“The Parole Board of Canada’s senior leadership team is committed to ensuring compliance with these recommendations and will undertake necessary follow-up action,” Robineau said in an e-mailed response.
