THE DISCIPLINE FILE
Recommended Orders
Date: January 15, 2018
Case No.: 17-019-RDO
IN THE MATTER OF THE ENGINEERING AND GEOSCIENCE PROFESSIONS ACT, AND IN THE MATTER OF THE CONDUCT OF [PERMIT HOLDER A]
The Investigative Committee of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) has conducted an investigation into the conduct of [Permit Holder A] with respect to a complaint initiated by a former employee (the “Complainant”), dated August 8, 2017. A. THE COMPLAINT The Complainant alleged that, as part of the settlement of a dispute between the Complainant and [Permit Holder A], regarding the cessation of his employment, [Permit Holder A] inappropriately required him to withdraw a complaint that he had submitted to APEGA in 2015, following the cessation of his employment. 1. The Complainant was employed by [Permit Holder A] from February 2012 through to January 2015. 2. Following the cessation of his employment, the Complainant submitted a letter of complaint to APEGA, dated January 28, 2015, in which he alleged that [Permit Holder A] and his former supervisor, who was a professional member of APEGA (the “Former Supervisor”), had engaged in unskilled practice and/or unprofessional conduct (the “First Complaint”). (b) [Permit Holder A]’s Requirement for the Com- plainant to Withdraw the First Complaint 3. While the Investigative Committee was investigating the First Complaint, [Permit Holder A] and B. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS (a) The First Complaint
the Complainant were engaged in settlement discussions regarding the cessation of the Complainant’s employment. 4. In or about July of 2015, [Permit Holder A] (through its legal counsel) proposed a settlement which included (among other things) a term requiring the Complainant to notify APEGA that he wished to withdraw the First Complaint to APEGA and to advise APEGA that he was satisfied that [Permit Holder A] and the Former Supervisor had acted in good faith and with due regard for the environment at all times during the period prescribed in the First Complaint, and that to the best of his knowledge, neither [Permit Holder A] nor the Former Supervisor had contravened the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act (the “ Act ”), its regulations, Code of Ethics , or any other applicable guideline. 5. Subsequently, on July 31, 2015, the Complainant notified APEGA in writing that he wished to withdraw the First Complaint in order to receive the settlement payment from [Permit Holder A]. In addition, he provided a letter to APEGA indicating that: “I am satisfied that both [my supervisor] and [Permit Holder A] have acted in the public interest, with integrity, good faith and due regard for the environment, public safety and other persons at all times during the period described in my Complaint.” 6. On August 11, 2015, APEGA received a further email from the Complainant, in which he stated that his letter dated July 31, 2015, did not reflect his opinion and that he felt that APEGA should expand its investigation rather than contracting or pausing it.
SPRING 2018 PEG | 65
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker