The union that represents Toronto Star newsroom employees called Tuesday for an independent investigation into the death of a Star reporter who recently took her own life.

By all reports of those closest to her, the last thing this award-winning global environment reporter wanted was to be the focus of this story about her suicide and its aftermath. She left explicit instructions that this very thing should not happen (“Please don’t talk about me. Please don’t let anyone write about me,” she wrote.) Nor did she want an obituary in the Star, the Star’s common practice when one of its newsroom employees dies. Her family also made clear those explicit wishes and the Star had tried to respect that.

I know for certain that I am letting Raveena Aulakh down in writing this story in my role as public editor tasked with reporting to our readers about her death in light of this now public call for an independent investigation. I can say that because several years ago, she sent me a note about my role at the Star, telling me, “You have never let a Star reporter become a public spectacle and that comes from owning up to mistakes quickly and honestly before it spirals out of control.”

This tragedy should not be a public spectacle and I wish it had not come to this. Certainly, serious mistakes of a personal nature have been made, and relatively quick and serious action taken by the Star as a result. But, sadly, too much here has spiralled out of control and in making this reporter’s death “news” in the interests of the “transparency” today’s journalism seems to always demand we are all doing exactly what Raveena, 42, implored against.

The Star’s policy on suicide says that the Star generally does not cover suicide unless there is some overriding public interest in doing so. While I, and Star editor Michael Cooke, questioned this in a 2012 public editor column on media coverage of the traditionally taboo subject of suicide, I also made clear in a previous column about suicide coverage my grave concerns that writing more openly about suicide could lead to intruding on the privacy of grieving families. To me, the wishes of the family are paramount and I am sorry we are going against the wishes of Raveena’s family here.

Journalists use the word tragedy a lot in reporting on the sad things of our world and to use it here seems to me to somehow belittle the dark grief so many of us feel now that one of us has died in such a heartbreaking manner. The Star’s newsroom is reeling, trying to make sense of the reality that Raveena chose not to live any longer. I have worked in newsrooms for 40 years and have never seen anything like the level of grief and anger exploding here.

“The newsroom is heartbroken and angry. Employees want answers. Workplace health and safety is at stake,” said a letter dated Tuesday from Unifor’s Toronto Star Unit, Local 87M to Brian Daly, the Star’s vice-president of human resources.

Those in the highest levels of senior management at the Star have told me they have conducted a thorough internal investigation following revelations and allegations made by the reporter in emails sent to several people in the newsroom shortly before she died. Those emails revealed that Raveena and Jon Filson, the senior manager, who had led the Star’s tablet project in the past year, had been involved in a relationship for some time that had ended recently. Further, the clearly heartbroken reporter made allegations in those emails about an improper relationship between Filson and his boss, managing editor Jane Davenport.

From the outset, those in the highest levels of Toronto Star management took these revelations and allegations with the utmost seriousness, said David Holland, Torstar CEO and the Star’s acting publisher. Both Holland and Torstar chairman John Honderich were informed immediately of Raveena’s shocking death. They tell me they quickly ordered an investigation into circumstances connected to her death and the shocking revelations and allegations in her emails and suicide note.

That investigation was carried out throughout last week by Daly and Alan Bower, the Star’s executive director of labour relations. I have been told that this is the usual course of action whenever allegations involving senior managers come to light. In this case, Daly and Bower, both trained as HR investigators, reported directly to the CEO and chair.

I do not know all of the details of what this investigation revealed but I can understand that much of what all are dealing with here are private personnel matters and that the Star has a long-standing policy not to comment on personnel issues.

“A tough investigation was conducted but we are obviously constrained from reporting any details because of the confidentiality of the people we interviewed and the circumstances under which the information was gathered,” Holland said.

“In some circumstances the people interviewed did so on the basis of anonymity.”

Action has been taken following this investigation. Filson and Davenport have lost their jobs in the newsroom. Filson has gone from the Star and Davenport “will move to a new role outside the newsroom and within Torstar, effective immediately” editor Cooke announced to the newsroom Monday.

As well, Holland told me, the investigation looked into the organization’s policies related to workplace relationships and conflicts of interest. It has concluded that these policies need to be “amplified.” This will be undertaken immediately.

In seeking an independent investigation, the union says the newsroom does not think these measures go far enough.

“We recognize the Star’s HR department is conducting an investigation and has taken some immediate action. We support this procedure,” stated the union’s letter, which was also sent to Honderich Tuesday.

In a bulletin to newsroom staff, the union stated that it has listened to newsroom members in formally seeking an outside investigation: “We want the third-party investigator’s mandate to include workplace health and safety and harassment issues, along with company policies and practices.”

For the company’s part, it says it has looked at those issues and has offered to meet with union officials to outline what was learned in last week’s investigation and address any other concerns related to the Star’s policies and procedures on all of these aspects. That offer was turned down.

“We have conducted a serious investigation at the highest levels; two senior managers have lost their jobs in the newsroom and policies are under review,” Honderich said. “We are open to any suggestions about policies moving forward and are ready to listen to anyone who wants to come forward with concerns.”

In its bulletin, the union made clear the ugliness of this tragedy as rumour and innuendo have mixed with few verified facts in the past week: “It is important to note that a significant amount of unconfirmed speculation is swirling about. We urge our members not to engage in public speculation.”

Certainly, no one here should ever minimize the fact that a talented, smart, journalist who achieved distinction for the Star in her courageous reporting, chose to end her own life. But, much sensitivity is called for too. The Mindset Guide on Reporting on Mental Health, written by journalists for journalists in co-operation with the Mental Health Commission of Canada, warns journalists not to jump to conclusions when reporting on suicide, pointing out that “the reasons why people kill themselves are usually complex.”

I do not know all of the relevant facts here, but certainly, as I have also written in past, any media coverage of suicide demands caution, context and compassion, as well as deep understanding that suicide is never just another story, but the end of a life in the most tragic way possible.

Sadly, that has become all too clear to all of us at the Star in recent days.

RIP, Raveena.