Evaluating the athletic complaint process

The evaluation of the athletic complaint process in Canada has revealed significant concerns regarding the Independent Third Party (ITP) mechanisms used for reviewing and investigating complaints. These ITPs operate without licensing or oversight, leading to criticism of their self-regulated nature. Despite being billed as a solution to improve objectivity, ITPs have raised concerns about financial burdens on sports organizations and potential conflicts of interest.

The hiring of ITPs to manage complaints can be expensive, and their decisions to dismiss certain types of maltreatment, such as psychological abuse, may prioritize more serious complaints. Moreover, the lack of mandatory qualifications or certifications for ITP staff raises questions about their competence to handle the complex and sensitive nature of these complaints.

Comparing the ITP process to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba (CPSM) complaint system, it becomes evident that the CPSM provides more accountability through an appeal process and the presence of a representative to assist complainants. The CPSM also appears to be more trauma-informed, recognizing the potential for retraumatization during the complaint process.

As the Future of Sport in Canada Commission report highlights, participants have expressed serious concerns about the fairness, due process, and fairness of ITPs. Therefore, it is crucial to reevaluate the efficacy of the current ITP system and address its shortcomings to ensure that sports organizations can provide safe and respectful environments for all participants.