The policies found on the website of the Secretariat are compulsory rules for the University community. The authoritative copies of the policies are held by the Secretariat and bear the seal of the University. The online version accessible through the website of the Secretariat is available for information purposes only. In case of discrepancy between the online version and the authoritative copy held by the Secretariat , the authoritative copy shall prevail. Please contact the Secretariat for assistance if necessary.
| Established: | 1 January 2017 |
|
Revised: |
28 October 2025 |
| Class: | G |
| Responsible/Originating Department: |
Associate Provost, Students |
| Executive Contact: |
Associate Provost, Students |
Related Policies, Guidelines & Procedures:
1. Policy 33 – Ethical Behaviour
2. Policy 34 – Health, Safety and Environment
3. Policy 71 – Student Discipline
4. Policy 72 – Student Appeals
Note: Capitalized terms used in this document have the meaning assigned to them in Appendix A of this Policy.
POLICY
1. Introduction
The University of Waterloo (the University) is committed to cultivating a safe and inclusive environment where every member of the community can thrive, without the fear of gender-based and sexual violence.
Gender-Based Violence (GBV) is any kind of harm or abuse that happens because of a person’s gender, how they express it, or how others see their gender. GBV can take different forms, including, but not limited to, physical, sexual, psychological, and emotional abuse.
Sexual Violence is a form of GBV. Sexual Violence includes any sexual act or act targeting a person’s sexuality, gender identity or gender expression, whether the act is physical or psychological in nature, that is committed, threatened or attempted against a person without the person’s consent, and includes sexual assault, Sexual Harassment, stalking, indecent exposure, voyeurism and sexual exploitation.
The University takes its commitment to combat Gender-Based and Sexual Violence (GBSV) seriously. This includes providing policies and procedures for those who choose to report GBSV, providing support to impacted community members, and making efforts to address underlying systemic roots of GBSV. Through this Policy, the University strives to reduce barriers to reporting GBSV and to foster a proactive community that embodies authentic care, concern, and respect for each other and our shared environment.
The University recognizes the intersectional nature of the work to both prevent, and respond to, GBSV within the University community.
The Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Office (SVPRO) supports all members of the University of Waterloo campus community who have experienced or been impacted by GBSV. This includes providing information about supports and resources available on and off campus, short-term coping and management strategies, and discussing reporting procedures. In addition to providing direct support, the SVPRO provides educational programming through trainings, workshops, and awareness-raising initiatives to foster a culture of consent on campus.
2. Purpose
The procedures and supports described in this Policy are available in circumstances where the person alleged to have caused harm (the Respondent) is a University Student. The main objectives of the Policy are to:
- inform individuals impacted by GBSV of supports available to them, and how to access them;
- establish the procedural options available within the University to individuals impacted by GBSV allegedly committed by a University of Waterloo Student ;
- outline the University’s response to Disclosures;
- outline roles, responsibilities and rights related to GBSV;
- ensure due process and fairness; and
- contribute to the cultivation of a culture that prioritizes safety and Consent for all University community members.
3. Legal Framework
In addition to the abovementioned “Related Policies, Guidelines and Procedures”, the policy will be construed in accordance with applicable law, in particular:
- Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.19
- Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46
- Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1
- Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.31
- Human Rights Code, R.S.O 1990, c. H.19
- University of Waterloo Act 1972, S.O., 1972, c. 200
- Sexual Violence and Harassment Action Plan Act (Supporting Survivors and Challenging Sexual Violence and Harassment), 2016, S.O. 2016, c.2
This policy shall be reviewed , at least once every three years, with student input, and will be amended as required to remain compliant with applicable legislation, regulations, and ministerial directives. In the event of any changes to the legal framework, including amendments, repeals, or new enactments, this policy shall be interpreted and applied in accordance with the most current legal requirements.
4. Scope
This Policy provides procedures and supports aimed at addressing instances of GBSV, where the person alleged to have caused harm is a University of Waterloo Student. For the purposes of this Policy, a Student is an individual who is currently registered at the University of Waterloo, with fees paid or arranged, or an individual who was a student, has not graduated, and can resume studies at the University without having to initiate a formal petition or re-application. This includes students on approved leave, exchange, co-op terms, and graduate students on approved inactive term(s), where applicable.
A University procedure may be initiated by a Student or employee when they believe they have directly experienced GBSV by a University of Waterloo Student (the Respondent).
Where the person alleged to have caused the harm is not a University of Waterloo Student, but is a University employee, or a Student who caused the harm in the context of their employment with the University, options may be pursued under Policy 33 – Ethical Behaviour.
There are three procedures available within the University to address concerns raised under this Policy. They include a Joint Agreement, Alternative Dispute Resolution and a Formal Complaint. The decision to initiate a procedure, and which procedure to initiate, lies with the Complainant. This decision can be complex and should be carefully evaluated. Support in making this decision is available from the SVPRO. Support is available to any University community member who Discloses their experience to the University.
While the choice of the Complainant will be a major factor considered, the availability of each procedure depends on the circumstances surrounding the alleged incident(s) of GBSV. The authority to determine which procedure(s) are ultimately available to address the concerns raised lies with the Decision-Maker. In making this determination, the Decision-Maker will consider the wishes of the person who is alleged to have experienced GBSV, and the input of the person alleged to have caused harm where applicable. The Decision-Maker may also seek guidance from University Advisors. Where requested, the authority to determine whether it is appropriate to change procedures mid-process also lies with the Decision-Maker.
In circumstances where a disclosure or complaint involves allegations that may fall under both this Policy and Policy 33 – Ethical Behaviour (e.g. harassment, discrimination, or abuse of authority), the Decision-Maker will consult with University Advisors to determine the most appropriate policy framework for addressing the concern. This determination will consider:
- the nature and context of the alleged conduct;
- the relationship between the parties (e.g. student-student, student-employee);
- the definitions and procedural requirements of each policy; and
- the preferences of the individual who has alleged that they have experienced harm, where possible.
Where appropriate, a coordinated response may be implemented to ensure procedural fairness, avoid duplication, and uphold the trauma-informed principles of this Policy. In all cases, the University will strive to ensure that disclosures and complaints are addressed under the policy that best reflects the nature of the harm and the needs of the parties involved. Definitions of key terms such as “gender-based violence”, “sexual violence”, and “harassment” will be interpreted consistently across University policies. Where discrepancies arise, the University will provide clarification to affected parties.
A summary of potential outcomes arising out of the procedures described in this Policy can be found in section 13.
5. Guiding Principles
5.1 Rights of All Participants
All participants in any proceeding under this Policy have the following rights:
- to be treated with compassion and respect with regard for personal dignity;
- to have their privacy reasonably respected under strict rules of confidentiality (subject to limits described in section 7.4);
- to have access to processes and procedures grounded in a recognition of the impacts of cultural, historic, racial, and gendered-trauma, respectful of diverse cultural expectations, social norms and lived experiences, where irrelevant questions are not asked;
- to be protected from any acts of reprisal, or expressed or implied threat of reprisal stemming from their participation in any procedure under this Policy or any Disclosure made, provided their participation is in good faith;
- to have matters addressed as expeditiously as possible, and to be informed when stated deadlines are extended;
- to a process grounded in the principles of natural justice, ensuring fairness and impartiality, including the right to be heard and to respond, and the right to receive a reasoned and unbiased decision;
- to be provided information about supports available where well-being is questioned, including concern that a disability exists or where an individual may otherwise need assistance, accommodations, or aid; and
- to be accompanied by a Support Person to any meetings with University administrators or investigators.
5.2 Rights of Those Who Disclose
All individuals who Disclose their GBSV experience to the University:
- are entitled to access the available supports, services and accommodations referred to in this Policy regardless of whether they file an official Complaint under this Policy;
- are entitled to make their own decisions about whether to pursue internal and/or external avenues of redress and/or their level of participation in any process undertaken by the University;
- will not be subjected to discipline or sanctions under University policies for violations related to drug or alcohol use at the time of the incident they are reporting, provided the Disclosure is made in good faith; and
- will not be asked irrelevant questions during the investigation process by the University’s employees or investigators, including irrelevant questions relating to sexual expression or past sexual history.
6. Decision-Making Authority
Authority for decisions made under this Policy lies with the Associate Provost, Students, or their delegate. Throughout this Policy, this person is referred to as the Decision-Maker.
In rendering any decision under this Policy, the Decision-Maker may consult with University Advisors, on a confidential basis, including, but not limited to, the following individuals and University departments:
- the SVPRO;
- the Special Constable Service;
- Legal and Immigration Services;
- Co-operative and Experiential Education;
- the Associate Dean(s) of the Complainant and Respondent;
- Human Resources/Managers/Supervisors;
- Counselling Services; and
- Campus Housing.
The Decision-Maker may seek advice from external subject-matter experts as needed.
7. Key Concepts
7.1 Disclosure
A Disclosure is the sharing of information about an incident or incidents of GBSV with a member of the University community for the purpose of receiving support, services, accommodations and/or learning about potential complaint procedures available through this Policy. A Disclosure may be made by any member of the University community who has experienced GBSV regardless of whether the person alleged to have caused harm is a University of Waterloo Student, and regardless of where or when the GBSV occurred. Section 8 of the Policy outlines steps any member of the University community should take upon receipt of a Disclosure.
Further details are provided in section 8 of this Policy.
7.2 Complaint
A Complaint is a written document that shares information about an incident or incidents of GBSV allegedly committed by a University of Waterloo Student. A Complaint is submitted to the Decision-Maker for the purpose of initiating a procedure under this Policy. A Complaint is required to pursue the following procedures:
- Joint Agreement
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Formal Investigation
In all cases where a Complaint is pursued, Interim Measures will be considered and implemented as appropriate.
7.3 Interim Measures
Interim Measures may form a part of any Complaint process under this Policy.
Interim Measures are not punitive measures. They are temporary conditions and/or restrictions that may be placed on Complainants and Respondents under this Policy and are limited to areas over which the University has authority. Interim Measures are implemented to support a safe campus environment and to maintain the integrity of the process. Interim Measures do not represent a finding that there has been a Policy breach but are meant to prevent harm from occurring, personally and/or procedurally. They may be in place for a specific period or until the case is concluded, and they can be altered by the Decision-Maker as necessary.
Interim Measures are to be as minimally restrictive as possible with specifics to be considered on a case-by-case basis. They are, however, serious conditions. A breach of Interim Measures may be considered as a further breach under this Policy or as an aggravating factor when determining outcomes. A breach of Interim Measures may be referred to the Student’s Associate Dean or to an employee’s Manager/Supervisor/Dean for consideration under other relevant University policies.
Examples of Interim Measures include:
- a requirement to not have contact with specified individuals;
- limited access to specified areas of the University at all or specified times;
- loss of University privileges;
- residence relocation, if residing within Campus Housing;
- changes to course schedules, or specific arrangements within a course;
- increased monitoring or supervision, for example with periodic check-ins with the Student’s Associate Dean; and
- any other condition, restriction or requirement that is appropriate and proportionate to the situation, that meets the goals of maintaining safety and the integrity of any procedure, including potential investigation.
7.4 Limits to Confidentiality and University-Led Processes
To the greatest extent possible, the University will respect an individual’s choice not to file a Complaint, and will keep any Disclosure made to the University confidential (sharing information within the University on a need-to-know basis only), prioritizing safety and, to the extent possible, anonymity. In exceptional circumstances, where required by law, or where a risk or potential risk of harm to the health and safety of the campus and/or campus community is identified by the Decision-Maker, and where sufficient identifying information is presented, information disclosed will be submitted to the Safety Office of the University for risk assessment, and/or, the Special Constable Service and/or submitted to the Associate Dean of the person alleged to have caused harm.
Where the results of the risk assessment require further action by the University, possible outcomes include:
- referral to the Decision-Maker for consideration as a Complaint, noting that the individual who originally Disclosed has the right to refuse participation in any resulting process; or
- notification/referral to third parties, such as local police or child protection authorities; and/or
- other response(s) deemed appropriate by the Decision-Maker in the circumstances.
The University’s Special Constable Service (SCS) will inform Waterloo Regional Police Services (WRPS) or other local police, of a Disclosure or Complaint that is brought to their attention in the following circumstances:
(a) where the affected person(s) actively and specifically request the SCS to notify WRPS to formally report the alleged or potential offence of sexual assault (on or off campus); or
(b) where the affected person(s) do not request the SCS to notify WRPS to formally report the alleged or potential offence of sexual assault (on or off campus) but where:
(i)there is a broader public safety concern;
(ii) there is reason to believe that there is a local police investigation underway involving the alleged Respondent; and/or
(iii) there is a reasonable basis to believe that an offence may have been committed by making the Disclosure or Complaint.
The following offences, and their attempts, are among those that must be referred to WRPS for investigation when formally reported to the SCS:
- intimate partner violence (past or present);
- domestic disputes or arguments involving people who are, or have been in an intimate relationship;
- child pornography;
- criminal harassment;
- hate crime offences;
- aggravated assault;
- assault causing bodily harm; and
- voyeurism.
Where a University led process is undertaken, the individual who has Disclosed, and to the extent possible the Respondent, will be kept apprised with updates on actions taken and any outcomes imposed as legally permitted.
8. Disclosures
8.1 Overview
Any individual University community member who has experienced GBSV can choose to Disclose their experience without filing a Complaint. A Disclosure does not initiate a University-led response unless determined necessary, as described in section 7.4. The SVPRO is available to assist any member of the University community who has experienced or been impacted by GBSV.
8.2 Intake
The University recognizes that Complainants who have experienced GBSV might initially Disclose to a trusted University community member, who is not the Decision-Maker or their delegate or the SVPRO. The University recognizes that Disclosures are often shared in confidence, that the Complainant may have an expectation of confidentiality, and that in many cases confidentiality is essential for Complainants to come forward. Accordingly, while the University community member may consult with the SVPRO for advice without revealing identities, they are expected to hold such information in confidence, except as permitted by the Complainant or if the limits of confidentiality outlined in this Policy apply. The University community member should:
- keep the Disclosure confidential, unless the person making the Disclosure consents, or one of the limits to confidentiality in this Policy applies;
- provide information about on-campus resources, including SVPRO;
- with consent from the person who has disclosed, contact the SVPRO to make a referral for support; and
- follow-up with the SVPRO as someone who has received a Disclosure, to confidentially debrief, if appropriate.
A University community member who witnesses an incident of GBSV affecting another member of the University community should contact the Special Constable Service immediately.
8.3 Supports Available
Examples of supports that can be provided by the SVPRO upon Disclosure include:
- providing a safe space for individuals to Disclose their experience(s), in as little or as much detail as they wish;
- discussing resources, both on and off campus that could provide further support or assistance, and provide referrals;
- discussing short-term coping strategies;
- collaborating with campus partners to facilitate requests for academic and workplace accommodations, residence adjustments, safety planning, and other identified needs;
- reviewing available Complaint procedures within the University; and
- reviewing available processes outside of the University, including reporting to regional police services.
Other supports available include:
- AccessAbility Services;
- Conflict Management Office;
- Counselling Services;
- Health Services;
- Occupational Health;
- Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Racism;
- Office of Indigenous Relations;
- Office of the Ombudsperson;
- Safety Office;
- Special Constable Service; and
- Faculty Associate Dean, Graduate and Undergraduate.
A Disclosure does not automatically initiate an investigation. An investigation may be initiated by the University in limited circumstances, as described in section 7.4.
9. PROCEDURES
In addition to the supports available to any University community member who Discloses their experience, the following sections of the Policy outline procedures available to University community members who have experienced GBSV. These procedures include:
- Joint Agreements (initiated by filing a Complaint as described in section 10, detailed in section 11, below);
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (initiated by filing a Complaint as described in section 10, detailed in section 12); and
- Formal Complaints (initiated by filing a Complaint as described in section 10, detailed in section 13).
10. Complaints
10.1 Overview
The submission of written concerns is required to initiate any of the procedures described in sections 10, 11 and 12. The term Complaint is used in this Policy to describe the written document submitted by the person who has allegedly experienced harm (the Complainant) to initiate a Joint Agreement, Alternative Dispute Resolution or a Formal Complaint. A table of potential outcomes for each of these procedures is provided in section 13.
10.2 Intake
To initiate a Complaint, the Complainant must provide the Decision-Maker with as much of the following information as they can, in writing:
(a) Complainant Information: Full name, and as applicable, student ID, program of study, year of study, and/or department of employment.
(b) Respondent Information: To the extent known to the Complainant, full name, program of study, year of study and any other identifying information (such as email address).
(c) Selection of Process: Indication of the procedure the Complainant wishes to pursue (Joint Agreement, Alternative Dispute Resolution or Formal Complaint).
(d) Incident Summary: A description of the events leading to the Complaint including approximate dates and locations where possible.
(e) Impact Statement: A brief overview of the impacts on the Complainant.
(f) List of Potential Witnesses: A list of potential witnesses, if applicable, or individuals who may have knowledge of the incidents of the Complaint, including contact information where available, and a summary of the information they may share.
(g) Complainant’s Academic Commitments: A description of the Complainant’s academic life, including, for example, on-campus presence, participation in co-operative education, and research commitments.
(h) Respondent’s Academic Commitments: To the extent known to the Complainant, a description of the Respondent’s academic life, to the extent known, including the examples listed in (g).
(i) Complainant’s Non-Academic Presence: A description of the Complainant’s non-academic life at the University, including, for example, engagement in activities such as athletic and recreational activities, committee or club involvement, employment and leadership roles, and frequently visited campus locations.
(j) Respondent’s Non-Academic Presence: To the extent known to the Complainant, a description of the Respondent’s non-academic life at the University, to the extent known, including the examples listed in (i).
(k) Requested Outcomes: Specific terms or resolutions the Complainant seeks through the filing of the Complaint.
(l) Additional Information: Any other information felt to be relevant to the Complainant in making the Complaint.
There are circumstances where a Complainant may not be able to provide some of the information requested above, especially in situations involving traumatic experiences. Complainants are encouraged to come forward with as much information as they are comfortable providing. Complaints can be supplemented with further information at any point before resolution, and can be reasonably altered as necessary. The SVPRO is available to assist with the preparation of Complaints, as are the employee and student representative associations and/or the CMO.
An allegation of GBSV made by someone other than the Complainant may be the subject of a Complaint to the University. The University’s ability to address the Complaint will depend on several factors, including, but not limited to, the information available and the Complainant’s decision regarding whether they with to participate in any procedure. In such circumstances, the Decision-Maker will determine whether the Complaint will be addressed through the procedures outlined in this Policy.
If a Complaint is made anonymously, the University’s ability to address the Complaint will be dependent on several factors, including, but not limited to, the information available to potentially substantiate the Complaint and to permit a procedurally fair process. In such circumstances, the Decision-Maker will determine whether the Complaint will be addressed through the procedures outlined in this Policy.
10.3 Potential Complaint Outcomes
Outcomes arising out of the Complaint procedures are limited to areas over which the University has jurisdiction or authority. This includes authority over access to University Property, use of University owned property or equipment, and participation in Off-Campus University Events.
Specific outcomes available through each procedure are described in sections 11, 12 and 13, and are summarized in the table contained in section 14 of this policy.
11. Joint Agreement
11.1 Overview
A Joint Agreement is available where a Complainant, a Respondent and the Decision-Maker may be open to discuss terms and conditions that would facilitate the shared presence of the Complainant and the Respondent on campus and their participation in Off-Campus University Events. A Joint Agreement may be available before, or instead of, the Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure or Formal Complaint procedure. A Joint Agreement does not result in a finding of fact, or a finding of breach of policy. It results in an agreement between the Complainant, the Respondent, and the University, facilitated by and enforceable by the University. The facts alleged in the Complaint are not discussed or investigated, rather the Complainant and Respondent agree that arrangements should be made to support living, working, and studying on campus and participating in Off-Campus University Events with minimal disruption.
Outcomes could include no-contact orders, confidentiality orders and arrangements made to promote minimal contact between parties. Joint Agreements allow the University to make best efforts to ensure that the Complainant and the Respondent are not placed in the same learning spaces or with the same co-operative education employers. They also aim to limit the occurrence and impact of other encounters on campus, where possible (e.g., Campus Housing, student groups, Athletics & Recreation).
Interim Measures may be considered and imposed as a part of the procedure and until such time as a final Joint Agreement is reached.
11.2 Scope
Joint Agreements may be available when:
(a) the person alleged to have caused the harm is a University of Waterloo Student; and
(b) where at least one of the following are true:
- the alleged incident(s) occurred on University Property, or;
- the alleged incident(s) occurred in a manner that used University-owned property or equipment including telephones, computers, and computer networks, or;
- the alleged incident involves technology facilitated GBSV, regardless of what form of technology is used; or
- the alleged incident(s) occurred off campus when the incident is part of a University of Waterloo course, or;
- the alleged incident occurred at an Off-Campus University Event that has been defined as such, or;
- when the likely consequences of the incident may adversely affect the Complainant’s course of learning, teaching, work, or living at the University.
11.3 Procedure
Once the Complaint is submitted, the following will take place:
(a) Confirmation of Receipt: The Decision-Maker will inform the Complainant of receipt of the Complaint, and will ensure that the Complainant has been advised of the supports available to them.
(b) Jurisdictional Assessment: The Decision-Maker will determine if the Complaint falls within the scope described in section 11.2. The Decision-Maker will also determine whether pursuit of a Joint Agreement is appropriate, taking into account relevant factors including but not limited to the nature of the Complaint, the likelihood of good faith participation, the presence of any power imbalances and whether the matter requires urgent or formal intervention. The Complainant will be informed of the Decision-Maker’s decision in writing. If the Decision-Maker determines that a Joint Agreement is not appropriate, the procedure will end.
(c) Clarification: If proceeding and if necessary, the Decision-Maker will ask the Complainant to clarify any points raised in the Complaint.
(d) Interim Measures Determination: The Decision-Maker will assess whether any Interim Measures are necessary, and if so, determine their nature. The Decision-Maker will consult with University Advisors, as necessary.
(e) Notification of Jurisdictional Decision and Interim Measures: The Complainant will be informed:
- whether the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the University;
- whether Interim Measures will be imposed; and, if applicable,
- what they will entail.
(f) Respondent Meeting: The Decision-Maker will invite the Respondent to a meeting to explain the circumstances, present Interim Measures, if applicable, and share the Complainant’s requested terms of agreement and outcomes. The Respondent will also be informed of supports available to them. The information discussed will be summarized in writing for the Respondent following the meeting.
(g) Interim Measure Adjustment: Interim Measures will be adjusted as necessary and changes will be communicated to both the Complainant and the Respondent in writing.
(h) Consideration Period: The Respondent will have at least five (5) business days to review the proposed terms and seek advice or support. Reasonable extensions will be granted by the Decision-Maker as needed.
(i) Respondent Submission: The Respondent may accept the proposed terms or submit a counter-proposal.
(j) Complainant Review: If alternative terms are proposed, they will be shared with the Complainant who will have at least five (5) business days to respond. The same rights to advice and support apply, and reasonable extensions will be granted as needed.
(k) Negotiation Procedure: Discussions will continue through the same process of counter-proposals and responses, until either an agreement is reached or until the Decision-Maker has determined that it is not likely that an agreement will be reached. The Decision-Maker will keep both parties informed throughout the process.
(l) Outcome/Final Agreement: If an agreement is reached, the Decision-Maker will share the agreement with necessary University departments for determinations on feasibility. Any alterations to the agreement will be shared with the parties, and a final document will be produced by the Decision-Maker for all parties to sign.
(m) Duration of the Agreement: The agreement will remain in effect until one or both Students are no longer enrolled at the University.
(n) Modification of Agreement: The agreement may be modified with the agreement of the parties, and/or at the Decision-Maker’s discretion. The Complainant, Respondent, the Decision-Maker, or any University Advisor may request a review as needed.
(o) Record of Unresolved Cases: If no agreement is reached, the University will keep a record of the attempt, which may be referenced if future complaints arise under this Policy, Policy 33 – Ethical Behaviour or if relevant concerns arise under the administration of Policy 71 – Student Discipline. If the matter is within the scope of the Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure or the Formal Complaint procedure, the Complainant may initiate either by informing the Decision-Maker.
11.4 Potential Outcomes
Joint Agreements generally result in:
- No-contact orders
- Restrictions on participation in portions of campus life
- Periodic check-ins with the Decision-Maker or their delegate
- Confidentiality agreements
- Such other term or condition that may be reasonable in the circumstances
12. Alternative Dispute Resolution
12.1 Overview
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) may be an appropriate procedure where:
- The Respondent accepts that harm has occurred; and
- the Complainant and the Respondent wish to explore outcomes collaboratively with the assistance of a trained, impartial facilitator.
The key difference between ADR and a Joint Agreement is that in the case of ADR, there is an acknowledgment of harm caused. ADR is a voluntary process and the Complainant or the Respondent may withdraw at any time. A decision to withdraw does not limit the Complainant from pursuing a Formal Complaint.
Offices including the Conflict Management Office (CMO) and the Office of Indigenous Relations (OIR) assist the Decision-Maker with the facilitation of ADR as appropriate.
12.2 Scope
ADR may be available when:
(a) the person alleged to have caused the harm is a University of Waterloo Student; and
(b) where at least one of the following are true:
- the alleged incident(s) occurred on University Property, or;
- the alleged incident(s) occurred in a manner that used University-owned property or equipment including telephones, computers, and computer networks, or;
- the alleged incident(s) occurred off campus when the incident is part of a University of Waterloo course or;
- when the alleged incident occurred at an Off-Campus University Event that has been defined as such.
12.3 Procedure
Once the Complaint is submitted, the following will take place:
(a) Confirmation of Receipt: The Decision-Maker will inform the Complainant of receipt of the Complaint and will ensure that the Complainant has been advised of the supports available to them.
(b) Jurisdictional Assessment: The Decision-Maker will determine whether the Complaint falls within the University’s jurisdiction, as described in section 12.2, and whether ADR is an appropriate method for resolving the concerns, taking into account relevant factors including but not limited to the nature of the Complaint, the likelihood of good faith participation, the presence of any power imbalances and whether the matter requires urgent or formal intervention. In arriving at this conclusion, the Decision-Maker will seek the advice of the CMO, or the OIR as appropriate, on the proposed method of ADR and will seek advice from other University Advisors as needed.
(c) Clarification: If necessary, the Decision-Maker will meet with the Complainant to clarify any points raised in the Complaint.
(d) Interim Measures Determination: The Decision-Maker will assess whether any Interim Measures are necessary, and if so, determine their nature. The Decision-Maker will consult with University Advisors, as necessary.
(e) Notification of Jurisdictional Decision and Interim Measures: The Complainant will be informed:
- whether the matter falls within the Jurisdiction of the University;
- whether ADR is appropriate in the view of the Decision-Maker;
- the nature of the ADR that will be engaged; and
- whether Interim Measures will be imposed; and, if applicable,
- what they will entail.
(f) Interim Measure Adjustment: Interim Measures will be adjusted as necessary and changes will be communicated to both the Complainant and the Respondent in writing.
(g) Consideration Period: The Complainant will have at least five (5) business days to decide whether they wish to proceed with ADR.
(h) Respondent Meeting: If the Complainant decides to proceed with ADR, the Decision-Maker will meet with the Respondent to provide a summary of the allegations, present any Interim Measures, and share the Complainant’s request to seek resolution through ADR with details of the proposed method of ADR. The Respondent will be informed that in order to proceed with ADR, they will be required to acknowledge that harm has occurred. The Respondent will be informed of supports available to them. The information discussed will be summarized in writing for the Respondent following the meeting.
(i) Consideration Period: The Respondent will have at least five (5) business days to decide whether they wish to participate in ADR. During this time, they may consult trusted advisors or Support Persons. Reasonable extensions will be granted by the Decision-Maker as needed.
(j) ADR Arrangements: If ADR is chosen, the Decision-Maker will contact the Conflict Management Office (CMO) or the Office of Indigenous Relations (OIR), where applicable, who will coordinate the procedure, including retaining external services as necessary, and will share necessary information relevant to the process with the Complainant, the Respondent and the Decision-Maker, including expected timelines. Face-to-face interaction is not required in ADR processes.
(k) ADR Procedure Management: The ADR process will be managed by the CMO or the OIR with facilitation and support from the Decision-Maker as required. The CMO or the OIR will ensure a final report of outcomes is produced and shared with the Decision-Maker.
(l) Outcome Review by the Decision-Maker: Upon submission of the final report, the Decision maker will review, seeking advice as necessary, and will either:
- accept the outcomes;
- modify the outcomes to ensure safety, feasibility, compliance with legal rights and responsibilities and/or rules of fairness; or
- reject the outcomes and require further ADR to seek an acceptable resolution.
(m) Final Agreement: If applicable, a final agreement will be drafted by the Decision-Maker for signature by all parties.
(n) Unresolved Cases: If ADR does not lead to a resolution, if either the Complainant or the Respondent determine that they no longer wish to participate, or if the Decision-Maker determines that it is not likely that a resolution will be reached, a final report will be prepared by the ADR facilitator, as arranged by the CMO or the OIR, for the Decision-Maker. The final ADR report will include a summary of the efforts undertaken, the resolutions that were proposed, any relevant evidence or information that was presented or arose through the ADR procedure, and any recommendations from the ADR facilitator and the CMO or the OIR. Both the Complainant and the Respondent will have the opportunity to make written submissions to the Decision-Maker on their view of the failed ADR procedure. The Decision-Maker will review the ADR report, including any evidence or information submitted during that process and seek any additional information necessary to assess the case, including engaging in an investigation, if necessary. In this case, the procedure will follow that produced in sections 13.3 (h) – (o), below. The Decision-Maker will render a decision based on the balance of probabilities, and impose outcomes.
12.4 Potential Outcomes
Potential Outcomes of an ADR procedure include:
- education/self-reflection;
- no-contact agreements;
- restrictions on participation in portions of campus life;
- acknowledgments and apologies, where appropriate; and
- any other condition, restriction or requirement that may be reasonable in the circumstances.
13. Formal Complaint
13.1 Overview
Where none of the options described above are appropriate for the Complainant and the Decision-Maker, where other procedures are not able to fully resolve, and/or where there is a dispute of facts surrounding the allegations made, a Formal Complaint procedure may be available. A Formal Complaint procedure results in:
- an investigation into the allegations made;
- a finding of fact based on the balance of probabilities;
- consideration of whether this Policy has been breached; and where a breach is found,
- formal disciplinary outcomes.
13.2 Scope
A Formal Complaint is available when:
i) the person alleged to have caused the harm is a University of Waterloo Student; and
ii) where at least one of the following are true:
- the alleged incident(s) occurred on University Property, or;
- the alleged incident(s) occurred in a manner that used University-owned property or equipment including telephones, computers, and computer networks, or;
- the alleged incident(s) occurred off campus when the incident is part of a University of Waterloo course or organized class activity, or;
- when the alleged incident occurred at an Off-Campus University Event that has been defined as such.
13.3 Procedure
Once the Complaint is submitted, the following will occur:
(a) Confirmation of Receipt: The Decision-Maker will inform the Complainant of receipt of the Complaint and will ensure that the Complainant has been advised of the supports available to them.
(b) Jurisdictional Assessment: The Decision-Maker will determine whether the Complaint falls within the University’s jurisdiction, as described in section 12.2 above.
(c) Clarification: If necessary, the Decision-Maker will meet with the Complainant to clarify any points of the Complaint.
(d) Interim Measures Determination: The Decision-Maker will assess whether any Interim Measures are necessary, and if so, determine their nature. The Decision-Maker will consult with University Advisors, as necessary.
(e) Notification of Interim Measures: The Complainant will be informed of:
- whether the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the University;
- whether Interim Measures will be imposed; and, if applicable,
- what they will entail.
(f) Respondent Meeting: The Decision-Maker will meet with the Respondent to provide a summary of the allegations, present any Interim Measures, and share the Complainant’s requested outcomes. The Respondent will also be informed of supports available to them.
(g) Interim Measure Adjustment: Interim Measures will be adjusted as necessary and changes will be communicated to both the Complainant and the Respondent.
(h) Consideration Period: The Respondent will have at least five (5) business days to consider the following options:
(i) No dispute of facts or outcome: The Respondent accepts the facts as stated and agrees with the Complainant’s proposed outcome. The Decision-Maker will render a decision on Policy breach and outcomes, providing a written copy to both parties.
(ii)No dispute of facts, but dispute of outcome: The Respondent accepts the facts as stated but does not agree with the Complainant’s proposed outcome. The Decision-Maker will render a decision on Policy breach and will determine appropriate outcomes, with input from the Complainant and Respondent, and provide a written decision to both parties.
(iii)Dispute of facts, but no dispute of outcome: The Respondent disputes the facts but agrees to the Complainant’s proposed outcome. In this case, the Complainant may choose to revert to a Joint Agreement procedure, or proceed to an investigation.
(iv) Dispute of facts and outcome: The Respondent disputes both the facts and the Complainant’s proposed outcome. In this case, the Complaint will proceed to an investigation.
(i) Non-Participation: If the Respondent chooses not to participate, the Decision-Maker will proceed based solely on the information provided by the Complainant and any witnesses. The Respondent will be informed of this decision, along with the final decision and outcomes, if applicable.
(j) Investigator Proposal: The Decision-Maker will provide the name of the proposed investigator for consideration by the Complainant and the Respondent. The parties will be given five (5) business days to challenge the appointment of the proposed investigator, with cause. If the Decision-Maker deems the challenge to have merit, this process will continue until an appropriate investigator is chosen. The investigator may be external to the University.
(k) Investigation Assignment: The Decision-Maker will retain the investigator. The parties will be notified of the appointment of the investigator.
(l) Investigatory Process: The investigator will explain their process, including expected timelines, and updated timelines where applicable, to the Complainant, the Respondent and the Decision-Maker. The investigator will conduct interviews with the Complainant, Respondent, witnesses, and any other relevant parties, will inform all participants of their confidentiality obligations, and collect and review any documentary evidence relevant to the investigation. The investigator will assess the reliability and credibility of all relevant evidence where necessary, before drawing conclusions based on the balance of probabilities. The investigator will submit a confidential final report to the Decision-Maker which will typically include:
- The scope and mandate of the investigation;
- A summary of the evidence considered;
- Assessments of credibility and reliability, if applicable;
- Findings of fact based on the balance of probabilities;
- A determination of whether the facts constitute a Policy breach; and
- a summary of their findings.
(m) Summary of Findings: Within twenty (20) business days of receiving the investigator’s final report, the Decision-Maker will provide the Complainant and Respondent with a summary of the findings, which will include:
- an overview of the complaint;
- a summary of investigative steps taken;
- the investigator’s conclusions and rationale;
- the Decision-Maker’s decision and rationale; and
- available support options.
(n) No Finding of Breach: If no breach of Policy is found, the procedure concludes. Supports will continue to be available to the Complainant and the Respondent.
(o) Finding of Policy Breach: If a policy breach is found, the Complainant will be given five (5) business days from receipt of the summary of findings to submit an impact statement and penalty submission. The Respondent will be given five (5) business days from receipt of the summary of findings to make a penalty submission. These statements/submissions should include updated information about their academic and non-academic activities on campus and participation in Off-Campus University Events including:
- academic status;
- participation in Off-Campus University Events;
- use of campus services;
- employment and volunteer positions;
- living arrangements, if within Campus Housing;
- commonly used areas of campus;
- leadership roles;
- their knowledge of the above information for the other party; and
- any other factors relevant to determining appropriate outcomes.
Outside of the above, the Respondent will also be asked to share any steps taken since the occurrence of the incident, that may demonstrate a commitment to avoid further policy breaches.
(p) Final Decision on Discipline: Within fifteen (15) business days of receiving impact statements, the Decision-Maker will:
- determine outcomes including disciplinary action if any;
- communicate the outcomes to the Respondent; and
- provide the Complainant with outcome details, within the bounds of University privacy obligations.
13.4 Potential Outcomes:
Potential Outcomes of the Formal Complaint procedure include:
- education/self-reflection orders;
- no-contact orders;
- restrictions on participation in portions of campus life;
- periodic check-ins with the Decision-Maker or their delegate;
- confidentiality orders;
- bans from Campus activity in whole or in part;
- removal from Campus Housing;
- loss of employment/restrictions on employment, including volunteer positions;
- suspension;
- expulsion; and
- any other condition, restriction or requirement that is appropriate and proportionate to the situation.
- Summary of Supports and Potential Outcomes
University community members who initiate any procedure under this Policy, and individuals who are named as Respondents, can be provided a variety of supports. These supports include:
|
From the SVPRO:
Other supports available include supports from:
|
Potential Outcomes of a submitted Complaint include:
|
Joint Agreement |
Alternative Dispute Resolution |
Formal Complaint |
|
|
|
14. Challenges to Decisions/Outcomes
A Complainant may file a grievance under Policy 70 – Student Petitions and Grievances (for students), the Memorandum of Agreement – UW/FAUW (for faculty) or Policy 36 – Dispute Resolution for University Support Staff (for staff) if they believe the decision or outcome to be unfair or unreasonable.
A Respondent may file a grievance under Policy 70 – Student Petitions and Grievances if they believe the decision or outcome to be unfair or unreasonable. The grievance should be submitted to the appropriate decision-making authority within the timelines stated in the governing policy.
15. Policy Review and Reporting
This Policy will be reviewed at least every three years, with student input, in accordance with legal obligations.
The University will maintain annual data about known Disclosures and Complaints relating to Sexual Violence reported by students, as well as information about student access to supports, services and accommodations relating to Sexual Violence. The University will report this data in accordance with the applicable legislation, regulations, and ministerial directives. Campus partners who provide supports and services for students affected by Sexual Violence will assist the University in the data collection process. The University will take reasonable steps to ensure that any data and information reported in accordance with the applicable legislation, regulations, and ministerial directives, does not disclose personal information within the meaning of section 38 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Appendix A – Definitions
Alternative Dispute Resolution: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to methods of resolving disputes and disagreements outside of traditional adversarial processes. ADR encompasses various approaches, including mediation, negotiation, arbitration, and conciliation, that allow parties to a complaint to find mutually agreeable solutions with the help of a neutral third party.
Complainant: A Complainant is a University Student or employee who is alleged to have experienced or witnessed harm, who wishes to pursue a University process to address that harm.
Complaint: A Complaint is a written submission made by a Complainant outlining the harm alleged to have occurred and providing pertinent and relevant information necessary to initiate a Joint Agreement, Alternative Dispute Resolution or a Formal Complaint under this Policy.
Consent: The voluntary agreement to engage in the sexual activity in question. Conduct short of a voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity does not constitute consent. Consent is not obtained, for example, where the Complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity, where the consent is the result of an abuse of a position of trust, power or authority, where the Complainant expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to engage in the activity; and where the Complainant, having consented to engage in sexual activity, expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to continue to engage in the activity.
Decision-Maker: In the context of Policy 42 Complaints, the Decision-Maker is the Associate Provost, Students or their delegate. The Decision-Maker is responsible for managing Complaint procedures and rendering decisions throughout and at the conclusion of such processes.
Disclosure: A Disclosure refers to the sharing of information about an incident of GBSV to a member of the campus community for the purpose of accessing services and supports.
Formal Complaint: A Formal Complaint procedure results in a formal investigation into the allegations, a finding of fact based on the balance of probabilities, a consideration of whether the findings of fact amount to a breach of Policy, and, where a breach is found, the imposition of formal disciplinary outcomes.
Gender-Based Violence: Gender-Based Violence (GBV) is any kind of harm or abuse that happens because of a person’s gender, how they express it, or how others see their gender. It is often caused by unfair power differences between people who differ in sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, gender expression or perceived gender.
Interim Measures: Interim Measures are temporary conditions and/or restrictions that may be placed on Complainants and Respondents under this Policy, implemented to support a safe campus environment and to maintain the integrity of any process undertaken.
Joint Agreement: A Joint Agreement is an agreement between a Complainant and a Respondent and the Decision-Maker to terms and conditions that aim to facilitate the coexistence of the Complainant and the Respondent on campus and in their participation in Off-Campus University Events before, or instead of an Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure or Formal Complaint procedure. A Joint Agreement does not result in a finding of fact, or a finding of breach of policy. The facts alleged in the Complaint are not discussed or investigated, and no discipline is imposed.
Off-Campus University Event: An Off-Campus University Event is an off-campus gathering or activity officially sanctioned, organized, sponsored, and/or overseen by the University of Waterloo or by University department(s), facult(ies) or employee(s). This includes off-campus academic activities (such as field trips, work placements, and co-op employment), administrative functions (including off-campus meetings that may have a social component), campus community events at external locations, and invitation-only events. Off-Campus University Events are reasonably recognized as affiliated with and conducted under the auspices of the University.
Respondent: The Respondent is the University Student who is alleged to have committed GBSV.
Sexual Harassment: Sexual Harassment means (a) engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct against an individual because of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, where the course of comment or conduct is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome, or (b) making a sexual solicitation or advance where the person making the solicitation or advance is in a position to confer , grant or deny a benefit or advancement to the individual and/or the person knows or ought reasonably to know that the solicitation or advance is unwelcome.
Sexual Violence: Sexual Violence is a form of Gender-Based Violence. It includes any sexual act or act targeting a person’s sexuality, gender identity or gender expression, whether the act is physical or psychological in nature, that is committed, threatened or attempted against a person without the person’s consent, and includes sexual assault, Sexual Harassment, stalking, indecent exposure, voyeurism, and sexual exploitation.
Student: A Student is an individual who is currently registered at the University of Waterloo, with fees paid or arranged, or an individual who was a student, has not graduated, and can resume studies at the University without having to initiate a formal petition or re-application. This includes students on approved leave, exchange, co-op terms, and graduate students on approved inactive term(s), where applicable.
Support Person: A Support Person is an individual who may provide moral and emotional support through procedures described in this Policy. A Support Person is normally a friend, fellow student or colleague or family member. The Support Person has no official standing in any procedure under this Policy.
University Advisors: University Advisors are representatives from University departments who may receive information related to the management of Disclosures and Complaints under this policy to provide advice to the Decision-Maker.