Evaluating the athletic complaint process

Be careful what you wish for.

The fervent desire of our Canadian sports communities to attain objectivity in processing complaints has led to the creation of a completely unregulated industry for complaint investigations.

As it stands, professional self-regulation has been criticized for operating in its own self-interest rather than the public interest.

But now we have a new Independent Third Party (ITP) industry which operates without licensing or oversight in carrying out its duties relating to reviewing and conducting investigations into athletic complaints.

The recently released report from the Future of Sport in Canada Commission indicates that participants who have been exposed to these ITP mechanisms have raised serious concerns about them.

Hiring ITPs to manage and investigate complaints is expensive and creates a serious financial burden on sports organizations with limited budgets. And not only that: the inherent employer/employee relationship in this arrangement also creates a potential conflict of interest.

A question which arises is, are ITPs inclined to make decisions that are financially beneficial to the sports organizations that hired them?

As an example, ITPs are responsible for assessing the legitimacy of complaints ranging in severity from physical and sexual abuse to psychological maltreatment.

Given the costs of adjudicating a complaint, are they likely to find ways to dismiss psychological maltreatment complaints in favour of accepting more serious complaints?

Under Sport Manitoba Safe Sport policies, an ITP case manager’s decision on the admissibility of a complaint is not appealable.

What this means is that a person can submit a complaint about physical or psychological maltreatment and have no recourse if a single ITP person with questionable qualifications rules that it does not meet their “threshold” for a Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport violation.

Indeed, ITP programs have been criticized for their lack of fairness and due process. Participants have complained about the bias of investigators and decision makers as well as the inconsistent interpretation and application of policies.

Currently there are no mandatory qualifications or certifications to be employed by an ITP organization. Do the ITP staff have the necessary experience and knowledge to deal with the complexity and sensitivity associated with complaints arising from the sport environment?

It is interesting to compare the ITP process to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba (CPSM) complaint process. What are the qualifications of college’s investigators other than being a physician? To the credit of the CPSM complaint system they do have an appeal process which recognizes that decisions can sometimes be arbitrary and fallible.

The college also employs a person to help complainants with the complaint process. One of the major criticisms of the ITP process is that complainants lack assistance and advice on how the process works and what their rights and responsibilities are at each stage of the process.

The ITP process has additionally been criticized for not being trauma-informed. Ironically, the lack of sensitivity and an overly legalistic approach in the complaint process itself can cause complainants to be retraumatized.

Victims who complain about maltreatment in sport violations often start to feel like they are offenders. Trust in a system that is supposed to protect them is undermined.

We all want safe and respectful athletic environments. But getting there is easier said than done. Turning a blind eye to how the ITP system functions is not acceptable.

We, being sports participants and administrators, need to evaluate the efficacy of what is a relatively new way to administer the sports complaint system.

Sport Manitoba provides services to 100 sports and 300,000 participants.

Is their ITP system working in providing processes and procedures that create a sport environment with the safeguards and accountability we want? Is this system clear, straightforward and accessible to all?

Is it fair and free from conflicts of interest? Is it trauma-informed and adapted to participants who have experienced harm?

These are just a few questions which need to be asked and answered.

Mac Horsburgh is a long-time competitive athlete who writes from Winnipeg.