HALIFAX — An openly gay man who alleges he was called "faggot" by a commanding officer and harassed until he quit the military will appear Tuesday before the Federal Court of Appeal.
Retired Sub-Lt. Paul Ritchie wants a judicial review of a decision from the Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissing his claim of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Ritchie could not be reached Monday for comment.
But documents filed with the court describe a complex legal fight dating back to 2009, the year after he enrolled to become a naval combat systems engineer in the Royal Canadian Navy.
A 22-page report from a Canadian Human Rights Commission investigator concluded that, as the military itself admitted, Ritchie was at times treated differently as he studied at the Naval Engineering School in Halifax.
One example cited was in May 2009 when Ritchie alleges he was denied "pre-boards" — a kind of practice test before final oral exams — as well as medical leave to deal with headaches and eye troubles. He later failed exams in June and August of that year.
Ritchie also alleges several incidents when training staff "created an unwelcoming environment for him because he was gay," says the investigator's report dated Dec. 11, 2014.
On Oct. 9, 2009, Ritchie alleges overhearing a commanding officer say to another officer dealing with Ritchie's leave request: "This should shut the faggot up."
"The (Canadian Armed Forces) says that it is a non-corroborated incident that was never reported to them at the time," says the investigator's report.
Moreover, the officer dealing with the leave request told the investigator that "he himself is gay, and he and his husband are welcome at all events hosted by (the military), including having a personal friendship with (the commanding officer)," says the report.
The investigator noted that Ritchie said he did not immediately report the alleged slur "because he considered it to be a 'one-off' comment."
"The conduct as reported in a single incident is not very serious," investigator Helen Gillespie concludes.
She found that even in cases where Ritchie was treated differently, there was no conclusive evidence that it was due to his sexual preference.
For example, Ritchie alleges in April 2011 he and a female lieutenant, who is also gay, were required to stay late before a long holiday weekend when the rest of their class was allowed to leave early. They were assigned to "duty lockup" — locking windows and doors at the end of the day — a task usually assigned to one person, says the investigator's report.
It also notes that the female lieutenant "agreed with (Ritchie) that they were treated differently from other employees."
The military denied the duty lockup assignment had anything to do with sexual orientation.
Again, the commission investigator concluded: "The conduct is a single incident and is not very serious."
Ritchie, who quit the military in 2012, wants compensation "that would properly reflect his salary, benefits, and contribution to pension that a 21-year service ... would bring," says the report. "The complainant declines to name a dollar figure, but notes that he would also request compensation for pain and suffering and humiliation."
The investigator recommended that the Canadian Human Rights Commission dismiss Ritchie's case.
"Having regard to all the circumstances of the complaint, further inquiry is not warranted."
UPDATE:
HEARING BEGINS IN HALIFAX FOR GAY MAN ALLEGING HARASSMENT BY MILITARY
HALIFAX — A hearing has begun in Halifax in the case of a former navy officer who alleges he was harassed because he is openly gay.
Retired Sub-Lieutenant Paul Ritchie is asking the Federal Court of Appeal for a judicial review of a decision from the Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissing his claim of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Documents filed with the court describe a complex legal fight dating back to 2009, the year after he enrolled to become a naval combat systems engineer in the Royal Canadian Navy.
A report from a Canadian Human Rights Commission investigator concluded that, as the military itself admitted, Ritchie was at times treated differently as he studied at the Naval Engineering School in Halifax.
However, the investigator found that even in cases where Ritchie was treated differently, there was no conclusive evidence that it was due to his sexual preference.
