NDP staffer who complained about alleged MPP harassment wrongly let go: arbitrator

The constituency assistant who claimed her boss, an Ontario MPP, was sexually harassing her was wrongly terminated by the NDP, an arbitration decision has found.

An Ontario NDP constituency assistant fired by the party after her boss was removed from caucus for allegedly sexually harassing her was unreasonably let go, according to an employment arbitrator.

In a decision released on Thursday, an arbitrator found that an assistant who was let go from former NDP MPP Michael Mantha’s constituency office after complaining about his conduct was entitled to compensation.

Mantha was removed by Ontario NDP Leader Marit Stiles in August 2023 when the party said misconduct allegations were “substantiated” against him. He was first elected in 2011 to represent the northern Ontario riding of Algoma-Manitoulin and is now sitting as an independent.

New details of the allegations, the workplace investigation that followed and its conclusions were included in the arbitration decision which considered two grievances filed against the NDP by its union on behalf of the employee — one for failing to maintain a workplace free from harassment, the other for being terminated without cause in January 2024.

In August 2022, an unnamed constituency assistant in Mantha’s office complained to the party that she was working in an unsafe environment, the decision said. In January, the NDP brought in an external company to conduct an investigation into the allegations.

The investigation found, on a balance of probabilities, that the complaints made by the constituency assistant – that Mantha had been sexually harassing her – had been substantiated.

“MPP Mantha requested that the Grievor send him sexually explicit photos of herself, advise him of any sexual dreams about him, and made comments about her appearance, including her makeup, hair, and clothes,” the arbitration decision said.

The balance of probability conclusions of the workplace investigation have not been tested in court and were not the specific subject of the arbitration decision.