Marli Rusen

Marli Rusen A leading legal expert in workplace conflict management. of The MIRROR Method and a charismatic, engaging, educational & entertaining

Marli Rusen brings years of extensive experience as a labour, employment and human rights lawyer to her current work as a third-party educator and problem-solver. Marli has effectively transformed her legal knowledge and understanding of workplace dynamics into proactive, practical and timely "tools" to assist parties with the informal and formal resolution of their complex workplace challenges an

d issues. Marli brings to third party arbitration a history of academic excellence and extensive practical legal experience. Marli was awarded the Gold Medals in Law (University of Victoria) and Psychology (University of Winnipeg) for obtaining the highest aggregate grade point average in each area of study. In addition, Marli was recognized for her specific academic excellence in the Law of Evidence and Employment Law. Following Law School, Marli Rusen clerked with the BC Supreme Court in Victoria, BC. Through this experience, Marli observed and was coached on the importance of transparent, fair and defensible legal proceedings, sound legal analysis and lucid decision making. Marli then spent over 18 years acting as a legal advocate for various parties (plaintiffs, defendants, employees and employers) who chose - or were compelled - to resolve their disputes through formal litigation and arbitration. Marli commits to applying her education and experience in a way that ensures that parties receive a fair and objective hearing, witnesses are treated respectfully and union and management receive a legally sound and practical decision in a timely manner. As a trouble-shooter, Marli will hear evidence from the parties, in an informal hearing, and issue non-binding or binding recommendations on how to resolve the issue. As an arbitrator, Marli will hear evidence and argument in a formal hearing and will then issue a binding award based upon the factual evidence and legal principles at play. Marli provides the following effective and practical tools to defuse and resolve disputes: educational, hands-on training and workshops for supervisors, employees and shop stewards; conflict management systems design and policy development; workplace interventions, such as environmental scans, conflict audits and investigations, to accurately diagnose and understand the issues; and formal assistance with conflict resolution, as a third-party mediator, trouble-shooter and arbitrator. Marli also is known to be a passionate, engaging and humorous key-note speaker on workplace/interpersonal dynamics and is commonly invited to speak at in-house events and industry-based conferences.

The Many Stories Behind Silence Silence - in a meeting, on a team or in a relationship, could have so many different mea...
08/26/2026

The Many Stories Behind Silence

Silence - in a meeting, on a team or in a relationship, could have so many different meanings.

It might mean someone is:

🔹Struggling (at work or home, due to health, personal or professional issues);

🔹Frustrated (yet not willing to share their experience due to past experience with having been ignored or retaliated against);

🔹 Scared (of being gaslit or further attacked);

🔹 Pressured by others not to speak up or resist, (that is, to just “go along to get along”);

🔹 Genuinely content with the situation, with no desire for change;

🔹 Satisfied with the position being taken or circumstances being disputed by others; or

🔹 Truly neutral and does not need or wish to take sides (and does not want to be pressured to do so).

Individuals on one side of an issue often interpret silence as a sign of agreement/concurrence with their viewpoint. Individuals on the other side will interpret silence as a symptom of fear/oppression.

Neither is automatically right or wrong.

Silence is not a matter to be interpreted, exploited or weaponized. It is something to genuinely inquire into, with an open and curious mind; and with a willingness to listen to the actual response, rather than scavenge for what one wants to hear.

When conducting internal (or external!) investigations into any workplace incident (be it safety, harassment or performa...
08/19/2026

When conducting internal (or external!) investigations into any workplace incident (be it safety, harassment or performance), it is important to remember that both the process and written report must be legally defensible.

Both must reflect and demonstrate that:

🔹 the process for all parties and witnesses was respectful, objective and thorough;
🔹 the findings of fact were based on a consideration of all relevant evidence;
🔹 all factual disputes were resolved through a proper assessment of credibility; and
🔹 all conclusions were reached based on the appropriate application of standards, regulations and policies that govern the substantiated facts.

🔹 No investigation, however objective and thorough, will cure a report that does not clearly set out the process and explain the basis for all findings and conclusions.
🔹 No investigation report, however clearly or professionally written, will cure an investigation that was not done properly or objectively.

Every investigator who reviews incidents of concern, including HR professionals and workplace leaders, must ensure their process is fair and defensible; and then clearly demonstrate that this is so through their written report.

Conflict shows up in every workplace, family and relationship. How we communicate through such conflict either improves ...
08/12/2026

Conflict shows up in every workplace, family and relationship. How we communicate through such conflict either improves the situation … or makes it far worse.

Our Effective Communication and Conflict Resolution for All workshop provides a practical framework on how to set up and see through challenging conversations with greater preparation, precision, and overall respect.

Learn how to speak so others are able to hear what you have to say. Learn how to listen so others feel safe sharing their thoughts.

Learn how to turn 15 minute conversations into your team’s #1, go-to conflict resolution tool.

Ready to start your training? Send me a message to learn more.

In my work as arbitrator and investigator, I am often privy to others’ assessments of credibility – comments are made ab...
08/05/2026

In my work as arbitrator and investigator, I am often privy to others’ assessments of credibility – comments are made about those who have made complaints as well as those who defend themselves against complaints being made.

A common error (arguably, in both investigations and everyday life!) is the risky and indefensible impulse to conflate a witness’ integrity/credibility with their likeability.

Those found to be soft-spoken, agreeable, and polite are often assumed to be credible and trustworthy; whereas those who are defensive and difficult often have their credibility questioned sooner and more often.

It may be easier to disagree with someone who is disagreeable. However, that doesn't make it acceptable.

The fact that someone appears professional and articulate does not, in itself, make their evidence more credible than that of someone who may come across as abrasive and irritating.

Credibility and likeability are two different concepts.

In work – and life – it is important to look beyond first impressions and appearances to genuinely consider all the circumstances presented to us; and then make decisions rooted in facts and evidence, not popularity and personalities.

Likeability is important at dinner parties; but should not be used to assess the credibility of allegations, denials and otherwise. Do not consider whether you like a witness or find them easy to get along with; consider, instead, whether their evidence on key matters, given the totality of circumstances, is believable and credible (likeable or not).

Let's Bring Back the Golden RuleLike many others, I learned of the Golden Rule in my early days at Elementary School: "...
07/29/2026

Let's Bring Back the Golden Rule

Like many others, I learned of the Golden Rule in my early days at Elementary School:

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

Regrettably, what I see happening instead is the reverse: “Hold others to a higher standard than ourselves”.

Often, individuals come to me with a sense of entitlement for having treated others disrespectfully. They have a handful of excuses for why they are justified in demeaning, belittling or excluding someone on their team.

Yet, when they are the recipients of similar mistreatment, they expect immediate consequences for “such unacceptable behavior”.

I see the same pattern with selective empathy. Many individuals point to the pressures they face (at work and home) when explaining why they lost their temper or made a significant error in judgment. They seek empathy, understanding and a chance to redeem themselves.

Then, when they hear of similar struggles faced by their adversaries, they shrug dismissively, and say “excuses, excuses”. They want support and understanding but offer little in return.

The Golden Rule isn’t complicated. If we expect others to treat us respectfully, then let’s endeavor to do the same. If we expect empathy and understanding when encountering hardships, then let’s offer that up to others.

Do unto others as you would wish done unto you … and be – for others – how you would wish them to be with you. That’s it.

I am dismayed at the number of hurtful comments being made, without any consideration for how they might land and the da...
07/22/2026

I am dismayed at the number of hurtful comments being made, without any consideration for how they might land and the damage they might cause.
Those making these comments focus on why they were said, and ignore the impact they have had.

When challenged, they often attempt to justify disrespect in the name of their “passion”, “beliefs” and “commitment to truth-telling”.

“I am just being honest” is not an excuse to say whatever we want, to whomever we want, however we wish.

Legally defensible and respectful communication mandates that:

🔹What we say (especially in the workplace) is relevant, necessary and objectively accurate; and

🔹Assuming the criteria in (1) have been met, we deliver the message in a professional, discreet and measured manner, having regard to our words, tone and overall demeanour.

If it doesn’t need to be said, don’t say it.

If it needs to be said, say it to the right people, in the appropriate rooms and in a respectful way.

If every person and team made this a priority, so many workplace issues would either be resolved early or avoided altogether.

It starts and ends with respectful communication.

Educate Don’t LitigateA healthy workplace culture is rooted in clear and consistent expectations. Such clarity and consi...
07/08/2026

Educate Don’t Litigate

A healthy workplace culture is rooted in clear and consistent expectations. Such clarity and consistency is established through respectful communication.
But what is respectful communication? Everyone has their own ideas and opinions around this hot topic.

Organizations must replace passionate beliefs and strongly held speculation with comprehensive “non-negotiables” for all.

Need immediate and flexible training? Our self-paced online training courses provide leaders and staff with practical, consistent and defensible guidance on what is – and is not – respectful conduct and communication.

Looking for a more collaborative team-based experience? Marli delivers live workshops (remotely or in-person) to share her helpful messages through engaging group sessions.

Not sure which you’d prefer? Chat with Marli and she can help you make the best choice for your team.

Increasingly, the term “gaslighting” is being used to describe disrespectful events in the workplace. It joins the list ...
07/03/2026

Increasingly, the term “gaslighting” is being used to describe disrespectful events in the workplace. It joins the list of serious accusations that also includes bullying, harassment, discrimination, toxic and psychologically unsafe.

While it is critical to recognize and remedy the harm associated with such behavior, it is also important to remember that accusing someone of gaslighting (or harassment and other wrongful behavior) does not, on its own, establish that it occurred.

When terms like gaslighting, harassment and others are used to describe a scenario, there are at least three possibilities to consider:

1️⃣ The term is an accurate depiction of what unfolded, including the harm that ensued;
2️⃣ The term does not accurately represent what unfolded but was applied mistakenly, without any ill-will; or
3️⃣ The term was misapplied deliberately in an effort to scare-off, shut down or silence others involved.

Here’s an example to consider:

1️⃣ Employee A accuses Employee B of making a derogatory comment about their appearance.
2️⃣ Employee B says they didn’t make the comment. No one else was present.
3️⃣ In response to Employee B’s denial, Employee A accuses Employee B of gaslighting them (that is, lying about what happened in an effort to create confusion and self-doubt in Employee A).

However, what if Employee B denies, in good faith, that the event happened? And what if the evidence ultimately supports Employee B’s version of events? That is, what if the comment wasn’t made?

While some denials of wrongdoing constitute gaslighting, deflection and defensiveness, not all do. Some denials are associated with a person’s legal and reasonable right to defend themselves.

In every situation, HR and workplace leaders must first discern what is meant by the term “gaslighting” (or harassment, bullying, lack of psychological safety, etc.). That is, what are the alleged behaviors that the person attaches to these serious accusations? They then need to objectively review the evidence and assess the credibility of each person involved to determine: (a) what most likely happened (factually); and (b) whether “what happened” objectively aligns (or not) with the legal and governing definitions of the terminology being used.


Only after an objective and neutral process has taken place may one attach such serious accusations to the behavior of others. And only then, should organizations take action against those being accused.

Words matter. Words harm. And for this reason, words, alone, cannot be used to replace, deny or undermine fair and defensible workplace reviews.

Training is one of the most rewarding parts of my work because it focuses on building a better future, instead of focusi...
06/24/2026

Training is one of the most rewarding parts of my work because it focuses on building a better future, instead of focusing on the past. That said, I love using story-telling and “lessons learned” to make sure my guidance is realistic, balanced and practical for everyone in the room.
Here is what one client recently shared about their experience with two of my courses:

"Marli delivered engaging and practical training sessions at the UNA that resonated well with our staff. Both the ‘Sexual Harassment Training for Staff’ and ‘The Customer Isn’t Always Right’ workshops provided clear, actionable strategies that our team could immediately apply in the workplace. Her approach was professional, relatable, and highly effective in supporting a respectful and accountable work environment.”

Thank you to the team at UNA for trusting me to help strengthen your communication and relationships with each other, customers and stakeholders.



Are You Setting Your Supervisors Up for Success?One of the most critical and challenging transitions, in my experience, ...
06/19/2026

Are You Setting Your Supervisors Up for Success?

One of the most critical and challenging transitions, in my experience, occurs when a front-line staff member is first promoted into a supervisory position.

This becomes even more complicated when they are asked to supervise their “former” peers.

Without sufficient direction, support and training, this could fast become dysfunctional – for the supervisor, the team and the overall organization. This happens when:

1. The supervisor could blindly align with the team, refusing to address material operational, performance and behavioral concerns, and failing to report these issues to management in a timely manner, if at all;

2. The supervisor could favor certain team members over others (typically, coworkers with whom they have worked closely), resulting in conflict amongst the team and a loss of trust in the supervisor; or

3. The supervisor’s promotion could go to their head, resulting in a misuse or abuse of authority, and an overbearing “I know best” attitude over team members. Many team members share that their supervisor was amazing as a coworker but then changed into someone who didn’t seem to care about those who now reported to them.

Supervisors (and their staff) need to be educated on perceived and real conflicts of interest, the dangers of favoritism and the need for consistent and respectful team accountability. They can’t learn this through osmosis, mind-reading, or walking down the hall to find someone with the answers. Workplace supervision has grown too complicated for this laissez-faire approach. It is incumbent on more senior leaders and HR to set up first-time leaders for success. Otherwise, the failures are not theirs to own.

Address

1321 Blanshard Street #301
Victoria, BC
V8W0B6

Telephone

+18775908153

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Marli Rusen posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Marli Rusen:

Shortcuts

Share

Category