Edmonton Police Union Members Face Systemic Sexual Assault and Harassment Culture, Letters Reveal
A former official from one of Edmonton's largest civic unions has made serious allegations about the workplace environment for civilian staff working with the Edmonton Police Service. In letters obtained by media outlets, the ex-union representative claims members face what he describes as a "systemic culture of workplace sexual assault, harassment and violence."
Allegations of Systemic Problems
Brad Goertz, the former labour relations officer for Civic Service Union 52, sent three letters to city and police officials in July 2025 outlining his concerns. In these documents, he asserts that approximately 900 CSU 52 employees working for the Edmonton Police Service experience what he characterizes as preventable incidents of psychological harm, sexual harassment, and gender-based violence.
Goertz specifically pointed to what he called a "failure of oversight" that he believes contributes to these workplace issues. The former union official lodged a formal policy dispute and requested consultations under the collective agreement, highlighting what he sees as significant gaps in workplace protection.
Dispute Over Employer Responsibility
The controversy centers on a fundamental disagreement about who bears responsibility for the health and safety of civilian employees working within the police service. According to Goertz's letters, various city representatives have indicated that the City of Edmonton believes it does not have a duty of care or legal liability for these employees' workplace safety.
"The union disagrees," Goertz wrote in his correspondence, taking the position that the City of Edmonton should be considered the employer for occupational health and safety purposes. He argued that the city's current stance has created an environment where workplace safety grievances cannot be properly addressed.
Union's Position on Employer Status
In his letter to city senior negotiator Michael Henry, Goertz elaborated on the union's perspective. He maintained that the City of Edmonton should be recognized as the employer for civilian Edmonton Police Service employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement. This designation would make the city responsible for implementing occupational health and safety legislation and workers' compensation requirements.
Goertz wrote that the alleged culture of workplace sexual assault, harassment, and violence "could only develop in the absence of appropriate oversight from the employer." He specifically connected what he sees as the city's refusal to accept employer responsibility with the development of problematic workplace conditions.
Police Service's Role in the Dispute
The Edmonton Police Service presents a different perspective on the matter. According to the correspondence, the city maintains that the police service itself should be considered the employer for these civilian staff members. This position would place responsibility for managing workplace safety grievances with the police service rather than the municipal government.
Goertz addressed similar allegations in a separate letter to the Edmonton Police Service's director of labour relations and compensation. In that communication, he reiterated his belief that the problematic workplace culture developed due to insufficient management oversight.
Scope of Affected Employees
The allegations concern approximately 950 Civic Service Union 52 members who work in various roles within the Edmonton Police Service. These positions include analysts, laboratory technicians, administrative staff, paralegals, emergency communications operators, and fingerprint technicians. These civilian employees perform essential functions that support police operations while not serving as sworn officers themselves.
Current Status of the Allegations
When contacted about the letters, Goertz confirmed he is no longer employed by Civic Service Union 52. He indicated that the circumstances surrounding his departure are subject to legal proceedings, specifically grievance arbitration. The former union official declined to provide additional comments beyond what was contained in his formal correspondence.
The allegations raise significant questions about workplace safety protocols, employer responsibility, and the protection of civilian employees working within law enforcement environments. The dispute highlights ongoing challenges in determining accountability structures when municipal employees work within police services that operate with some degree of independence from city administration.
