Canadian Labour Reporter - sample

8 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2016 October 10, 2016 ARBITRATION AWARDS have deliberately undermined su- pervisory authority. Finally, you have demonstrated consistent in- solence and dishonesty and have failed to accept accountability for your actions," said the letter de- tailing his firing for cause. On June 23, 2014, Budarick at- tended a meeting with Andrew Baker, general supervisor in mine operations at Teck HVC. Budar- ick was given a warning but no formal discipline. After the meeting, Budarick filed a bullying grievance against Baker. He said that earlier dis- cipline for falling asleep on the job was too harsh, as many other workers did the same without consequences. Budarick also sent an email to Baker regarding a potential safety violation at the plant and directly spoke with Greg Brouwer, op- erations manager at Teck HVC, about Baker's conduct. On Dec. 15, Budarick filed six health and safety grievances re- garding "near misses" between trucks at the mine. A further six grievances were filed on behalf of the union local office. Baker contended the 12 griev- ances were intended to "bury the employer in paperwork," by prompting multiple investigations. On April 15, 2015, Baker and Budarick again met to discuss the previous few months' worth of in- cidents. He was told the "benefit of the doubt" would no longer be given and the next incident could result in formal discipline. Tyler Boice, mine supervisor, formally suspended Budarick in August for encouraging ille- gal strikes earlier in the month. Budarick served a one-day sus- pension. The next incident occurred in September. Budarick was told to attend a meeting acting as shop steward but he took a detour through the plant, which was a violation of the mine's safety rules requiring all workers to be ac- counted for at all times. Budarick's reasoning for cut- ting through the plant was to find another shop steward to fill his place as he was interested in "step- ping back" from his position as union representative. The final incident concerned an alleged message delivered via the truck messaging system to a driver, ordering him not to use the washroom at the end of a shift. Budarick accused a supervisor, known only as "Mr. Pitre," that the message was inappropriate and as union representative, he wished to take umbrage with him. He ap- proached the supervisor in a pub- lic area and berated him repeat- edly, accusing him of committing a human rights violation. Because of the stress of the messaging incident, Budarick took a medical leave and returned to work Jan. 17, 2016. However, he was suspended by the company and told to go home. Two days later, a meeting was held to discuss the November in- cidents and his behaviour. Budar- ick refused to take responsibility and was terminated. Teck HVC accused Budarick of "maliciously attempting to pub- licly embarrass Mr. Pitre without confirming facts or evidence with others." The company argued Budarick acted as an employee, not a shop steward, during the previous incidents and, as a result, the relationship had deteriorated so badly it could not continue. But when Budarick confronted the supervisor to discuss the mes- saging incident, he was within his rights as a shop steward, accord- ing to arbitrator Corinn Bell. "Comments and behaviour that might otherwise result in discipline are treated differently when made by a union representative in the course of his or her union duties, even when the union representa- tive is also an employee," said Bell. "I do find the following: he acted on incorrect information; he acted before confirming the al- legations or researching relevant policies and/or laws; and he acted in a public venue. But, I do not find that he acted dishonestly in this interaction," said Bell. "I am satisfied that he was acting with bona fide concern for the well- being of Mr. Williamson, a union member, in his capacity as a shop steward in this public meeting." Budarick was ordered reinstat- ed, with only a one-shift suspen- sion for the culminating incident. Reference: Teck Highland Valley Copper and United Steelworkers, Local 7619. Corinn Bell — arbitrator. Keri Bennett for the employer. Stephanie Drake for the employee. Sept. 7, 2016. 'Labour relations gone amok' in Calgary grievance A forklift driver on sick leave was allegedly directing construction at a liquor store he owned, instead of being at work. Paul Gill worked at Apel Extru- sions in Calgary for 10 years be- fore being fired. Apel contended Gill took too many days off, which was in con- travention of the collective agree- ment. Mike Flynn, company presi- dent, testified that Gill's absences were becoming a concern. "He seemed to be working hard at not being at Apel." But he was approved for 15 days' time off May 1, 2015, due to stress from the job and, specifically, his direct supervisor Charlie Dhaliw- al. Gill said he was repeatedly sin- gled out for discipline by Dhaliwal. On May 4, Dhaliwal and hu- man resources manager Cheryle Adolph went to the liquor store construction site to see if Gill was working while on leave. They said they spoke to workers on site, who said Gill would return later that day. But Gill said he may have stopped by the site on the day, but he was not working there. He testified the store was still in a pre- opening stage and he had no skills in construction or design, so it would be counter-productive for him to attend. Gill's ownership of the store was not a secret to the company: Dhaliwal had known about it for months, and many workers in the shop also were aware of it. On May 6, 2015, the employer accused him of conducting busi- ness at another site, contrary to the collective agreement. "Given you were working at your second place of business while on medical leave, we are hereby terminating your employ- ment for breach of trust and con- travention of article 13.04. This is effective immediately," said the termination letter. Article 13.04 stated: "If an em- ployee, while on leave of absence, accepts, undertakes or enters into on a temporary or permanent ba- sis, other employment, business venture or calling, without the writ- ten permission of the company, he shall be deemed to have ceased em- ployment with the company." The union argued the company rejected progressive discipline for multiple absences and jumped directly to termination once it seized upon the liquor store con- struction as just cause. Arbitrator Alan Beattie reject- ed the company's argument that Gill worked at another place of business, effectively severing his relationship. "It was well-known by the com- pany that the grievor was in the process of establishing a liquor store and any reasonable person would expect him to drop in oc- casionally to see the progress of construction. He did that in off- hours when he was employed by the company and there was noth- ing to prevent him from doing so when he was on the medical leave of absence." As well, the arbitrator slammed the company for not addressing perceived absenteeism. "It is incomprehensible how the company could, on a knee-jerk reaction, fire a 10-year employee with no disciplinary record with- out engaging in any discussion with him," said Beattie. "If they had a concern about absences, (it should have) arranged for a first counseling session. It is also in- comprehensible, and inexplicable, how the grievance process seems to have been totally ineffective, not even involving the grievor. The whole situation has been a classic example of labour relations gone amok." Gills was ordered reinstated with no loss of pay or seniority. Reference: Teck Highland Valley Copper and United Steelworkers, Local 7619. Corinn Bell — arbitrator. Keri Bennett for the employer. Stephanie Drake for the employee. Sept. 7, 2016. < Shop steward pg. 1

• Cover