A harassment complaint at a private club is rarely simple. The person accused might be a long-standing member, a generous donor, or a director’s close friend, and the person harmed might be a nineteen-year-old server or a fellow member. Clubs that treat these situations as internal politics rather than legal obligations expose themselves on several fronts at once.
Ontario’s golf and country clubs, city social clubs, athletic and tennis clubs, yacht clubs and curling clubs occupy an unusual legal position. They are employers, and they are member-governed corporations, at the same time. A single incident can pull both sets of duties into play, and the two run on entirely different legal engines.
Key Takeaways
- An Ontario private club is both an employer and a member-governed corporation, so one harassment complaint can trigger duties to staff and to members at the same time, under different laws.
- When the person harmed is a worker, the Occupational Health and Safety Act requires the club to investigate, even without a formal complaint, and regardless of whether the harasser is an employee, a member, or a guest.
- Member-on-member matters fall outside the OHSA but are governed by the club’s by-laws and the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010, which requires fair process before discipline: authority set out in the by-laws, at least 15 days’ notice with reasons, and an opportunity to be heard.
- A club cannot hide behind “this is our internal business”, because it is incorporated and its by-laws form a contract with members, its disciplinary decisions are reviewable by the courts.
- For serious or public matters, especially where a director or prominent member is involved, an independent investigator protects both fairness and the club’s credibility.
A Club is Really Two Organizations at Once
To its staff, a club is an employer. That relationship is governed by the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and, where a protected ground is involved, the Ontario Human Rights Code.
To its members, a club is a corporation those members belong to and help govern. That relationship is governed by the club’s own by-laws and code of conduct, the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010 (ONCA) under which most Ontario clubs are incorporated, and, because a club provides services and facilities to its members, the Human Rights Code again.
Understanding which hat you are wearing when a complaint lands is the whole game. Get it wrong, and you either under-investigate a matter the law treats as mandatory, or you steamroll a member’s procedural rights.
The Staff Side: A Duty You Cannot Opt Out of
When the person harmed is a worker, the club’s obligation is not discretionary. Under section 32.0.7 of the OHSA, an employer must ensure that an investigation into incidents and complaints of workplace harassment is conducted that is “appropriate in the circumstances,” and must inform the worker who experienced the harassment, and the alleged harasser, if that person is also a worker, of the results and any corrective action.
Two features of this duty routinely catch clubs off guard.
First, the trigger is incidents and complaints, not just formal, written complaints. The obligation arises once the club becomes aware of conduct that may be harassment, even where no one has filed anything and even where the affected employee would rather let it go. This is the same principle we explore in our discussion of the duty to investigate when no one is formally complaining.
Second, and this is where clubs get into real trouble, the duty applies no matter who the harasser is. A server harassed by a member is still a worker harassed in a workplace. “He’s one of our members” is not a defence to the failure to investigate; it is an aggravating fact. Some of the hardest files we see involve a valued, dues-paying member whose conduct toward staff has been quietly tolerated for years because no one wanted the confrontation.
The Member Side: Quieter Duties, but Real Ones
Where the complaint is member-on-member, the OHSA generally does not apply, there is no worker at the centre of it. But that does not mean the club is free to do nothing, or to do whatever it likes.
If a club’s by-laws give it the power to discipline or expel a member, section 51 of the ONCA dictates how that power must be used. The power must actually be set out in the articles or by-laws; it must be exercised in good faith and in a fair and reasonable manner; and the member must receive at least 15 days’ notice of the proposed discipline or termination with reasons, along with an opportunity to be heard before it takes effect. A member who believes the club got this wrong can apply to the court.
This is where many clubs assume the courts will simply defer to them, treating member discipline as a purely internal affair. That assumption is shakier than it looks. Courts tend to stay out of the decisions of genuinely private, unincorporated associations, the kind with no by-laws, no statutory footing, and no property or financial stake for members. A modern Ontario club is the opposite on every count: it is incorporated under the ONCA, its by-laws function as a contract with each member, and members often hold real financial interests through equity or capital contributions. Those contractual and proprietary rights are exactly what make a club’s disciplinary decisions reviewable, which is why “this is our internal business” is a fragile position for a club to stand on.
The Four Ways Harassment Shows Up at a Club
Sorting a complaint by who is involved tells you what you owe:
- Staff harassing staff: classic workplace harassment; the OHSA investigation duty applies in full.
- A member harassing staff: still workplace harassment; investigate and protect the worker regardless of membership status.
- Staff harassing a member: an employment discipline matter, and potentially a Human Rights Code issue for the member as a recipient of the club’s services.
- A member harassing a member: governed by the by-laws, the ONCA fair-process rules, and possibly the Code; still investigate before disciplining anyone.
Getting the Investigation Right
Whichever track you are on, the fundamentals of a defensible process are the same. Use an investigator who is genuinely impartial and not reporting to the person implicated, for anything sensitive, or where a director, officer or prominent member is involved, that usually means an independent, third-party investigator rather than a fellow board member. A house, grievance or membership committee may have authority to discipline a member, but its members usually know the parties too well to credibly investigate them, keep the two functions separate. Keep the circle of people who know the details small, extend procedural fairness to both sides, and document each step. The Ministry of Labour’s guidance points to completing workplace harassment investigations within 90 days absent good reason.
Move quickly, especially in a busy summer season. Clubs generate a great deal of time-limited evidence, schedules, access records, reservation and point-of-sale records, incident reports, member communications, security footage, and delay lets it weaken while rumours harden. Interim measures also deserve care: separating a member and a staff complainant by adjusting schedules, restricting contact or asking a member to avoid certain areas is prudent and does not pre-judge anything, but make sure the measure doesn’t fall on the complainant, moving a server to a back-of-house role that cuts their tips or hours can read as a reprisal, which Ontario law prohibits. And where a matter engages both tracks, coordinate them so findings on one side don’t contaminate the other.
Our overview of conducting workplace harassment investigations sets out the mechanics, and our guidance on what to do after the investigation report covers the decisions that follow.
Protecting Your Private Club
Most of this is manageable with foresight. Maintain a workplace harassment policy and program that meets the OHSA, and a member code of conduct with a discipline procedure that tracks the notice, reasons and hearing requirements of ONCA section 51. Watch a common gap: the membership agreement often says nothing about behaviour, leaving the club no clear footing to act, align it with the code of conduct and expressly reserve the right to discipline, suspend or revoke membership for breaches. All of this belongs in your workplace policies and should be reviewed before you need it. Train the general manager, department heads and board to receive a complaint without mishandling it, and commit in advance that a member’s status or generosity will not bend the process. When a member is the respondent, get legal advice early, unlike an HR consultant, counsel can advise on the discipline and defence dimensions as well as the investigation, and early is when a well-intentioned board is most likely to create liability rather than resolve it.
Handling a Complaint Involving a Member?
Greenwood Law advises Ontario private clubs on both sides of these situations, meeting the workplace investigation duties owed to staff and the governance and fair-process obligations owed to members, and conducting or reviewing workplace investigations when the stakes are high. Contact Greenwood Law for a confidential consultation before you respond to a complaint or discipline a member.
