Investigation
The Counseling and Investigation Committee (CIC) is responsible to review all formal complaints made to SSMLT. Complaints are received by the SSMLT office and are forwarded to the CIC. The CIC reviews the complaint and determines whether the complaint meets the threshold in order to investigate.
In determining the threshold, they will consider whether the complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the SSMLT and if it is within the definitions of professional misconduct or professional incompetence outlined in the MLT Act.
The SSMLT will notify the person making the complaint (the complainant) advising them that the complaint has been received and whether it will be investigated.
The complaint(s) will be provided to the member (respondent) against whom a complaint has been filed and a response will be required within 30 days.
The complainant, the member and any other witnesses to the incident may be interviewed by a member of the Committee or an outside investigator. Other relevant information will be reviewed as well. A written investigation report will be provided to the Counseling and Investigation Committee. All reports are confidential and will only be shared with the complainant, the member, and the two Committees if a decision is made to refer the matter to a Discipline Committee.
Once the Counseling and Investigation Committee has all the information they require, they make one of three decisions:
- The Committee may indicate 'no further action' in the case:
-
- if the actions of the medical laboratory technologist appear to be in compliance with the legislation, standards and guidelines of the Regulator; or
- if there is insufficient evidence to support/indicate a violation occurred; or
- if the matter is not within the jurisdiction of the Regulator; or
- if evidence in the investigation tends to show there may be undesirable practice or conduct, and there are opportunities for the Member to improve their practice to be more safe, effective or ethical through feedback and recommendations. There is insufficient evidence to refer the matter to a disciplinary process. The CIC may issue a letter of caution. This is a non-disciplinary option.
- There is evidence to support concerns regarding professional competence and/or conduct. If based on the evidence it is in the public interest to offer a low-level resolution, the Committee may decide the case may benefit from an “alternative dispute resolution” process such as mediation with a third party to negotiate a Consensual Complaint Resolution Agreement (CCRA).
- If the Committee are unable to negotiate a CCRA, or if based on the evidence it is not in the public interest to offer a low-level resolution (CCRA), the matter is then referred to a Discipline Hearing. This is a formal hearing process where the medical laboratory technologist is charged with Professional Incompetence and/or Professional Misconduct as defined in The Medical Laboratory Technologists Act. Discipline hearings are public (MLT Act- s. 24 (14) Complainants may be required to be a witness at a hearing. Complainants that are not required to be a witness, will be notified of the hearing and can attend if they wish. Complainants may be required to testify at the hearing.