Canadian Labour Reporter is the trusted source of information for labour relations professionals. Published weekly, it features news, details on collective agreements and arbitration summaries to help you stay on top of the changing landscape.
Issue link: https://digital.hrreporter.com/i/1350703
PLTs couldn't wear masks when
performing work that required
safety googles, as the masks
fogged up the goggles.
Urgl felt the city and his co-
workers weren't doing enough
to prevent the spread of CO-
VID-19, but he couldn't point to
any specific safety violations. He
displayed verbal aggression and a
lack of interpersonal skills on the
job and the city suspended him
for three days on July 28 for insub-
ordination, harassment and fail-
ing to co-operate with the city's
investigation.
A member of Urgl's crew
emailed the city saying the dis-
cipline wasn't enough, as he felt
Urgl represented a safety issue for
the crew by contributing to low
morale and mental health issues.
On Aug. 31, a union shop stew-
ard encountered Urgl in the city
offices filling out a leave form.
The steward made a joke about
looking for time off already be-
cause it was Monday morning,
to which Urgl replied, "When I
have my mind made up I follow
through." The two went up to the
employee changeroom, where
they continued to talk. During the
conversation, Urgl repeated his
remark about following through
and made other comments about
"burning the city down," and "it's
like throwing a grenade into a
room."
The steward felt uncomfort-
able about the comments, so he
warned Urgl about his language
and tried to steer the conversa-
tion towards another topic. An-
other employee was in the shower
area and overheard. This employ-
ee was concerned about what
Urgl was saying so he recorded
the conversation on his cell-
phone. The steward didn't report
the conversation to management
but the employee who recorded it
did.
Urgl initially claimed he didn't
remember making any of the
comments, except for the gre-
nade one, although he said some
of them sounded like something
he would say. He explained that
the grenade comment was an
analogy to the fact that he felt
threatened at work and he needed
to defend himself.
Management felt Urgl's expla-
nation didn't make sense, as the
conversation had not been about
a workplace problem. The city
concluded that Urgl made the
statements, which were threat-
ening in nature and showed "an
animus toward your employer
and potentially your coworkers
that completely and utterly un-
dermines the trust necessary for a
viable employment relationship."
The city terminated Urgl's em-
ployment effective Sept. 17.
The union argued that the city
didn't have just cause for termi-
nation as the comments weren't
threats and were intended as "a
private discussion about work-
place issues," noting that the
steward didn't feel threatened by
the comments in their context.
The union also argued that the
termination was in part due to
Urgl's conduct before his suspen-
sion, for which he had already
been disciplined.
The arbitrator found that Urgl
didn't provide an adequate expla-
nation for his comments, so the
city was "entitled to protect itself
against all possible risks con-
tained within the language" Urgl
used, including "injury, death or
damage or destruction to prop-
erty."
The arbitrator also found that
Urgl didn't display any insight
into the nature of his comments
and his coworkers were impact-
ed by his conduct and had safety
concerns about working with
him. In addition, Urgl wasn't dis-
ciplined twice for his previous
misconduct — the city consid-
ered his past record for related
misconduct in determining that
the employment relationship was
irreparably damaged, said the ar-
bitrator in upholding the termi-
nation.
Reference: New Westminster (City) and IBEW, Local 213. Paul Love — arbitrator. Greg Heywood for employer.
Andrew Buchanan for employee. Jan. 26, 2021. 2021 CarswellBC 257
third observed the process.
The written lockup policy re-
quired inmates to line up out-
side their cells. However, this
was rarely followed and Gardner
claimed he had never been coun-
selled or disciplined in relation to
it. On the day of the assault, Gard-
ner was responsible for moving
the inmates into their cells while a
colleague checked that they were
in their proper cells.
Video surveillance footage
showed that Gardner was at the
station desk in the unit reading a
book and looking at his cellphone
at the time of the assault — of-
ficers weren't supposed to have
cellphones or reading material
in the unit. It also showed Gard-
ner looking through the window
of the cell where the assault took
place during the inspection and
later walking by when a cloth cov-
ered the window.
Gardner said that he didn't
see any signs of a struggle in
the cell — one inmate was at
the window and the injured one
was lying on the bed — and as-
sumed things were fine since his
colleague had looked already.
He also said that he didn't think
anything of the cloth cover-
ing the cell window, as it was
common practice for inmates
who wanted temporary privacy
to use the toilet. However, he
didn't check back later, which
was the standard practice.
Gardner explained that his
daughter had been struck by a
car the previous day and he had
his cellphone so he could text her
and a book to distract him from
the stress. He also said he left 20
minutes early because he was
anxious to get home to his daugh-
ter, but he acknowledged that he
shouldn't have left early.
The TSDC terminated Gard-
ner's employment for failing to
properly perform his duties.
The arbitrator found that
Gardner was aware of the policies
against cellphones and reading.
Breaching these policies, as well
as leaving early and not following
up on the covered window, were
cause for discipline, said the arbi-
trator.
However, the arbitrator found
that there wasn't cause for disci-
pline for not following the written
lockup procedure or not signing
the logbook, as neither were part
of common practice.
"It is inappropriate for an em-
ployer to discipline an employee
for breach of a policy that is rou-
tinely not followed, and for which
other employees have not been
similarly disciplined," the arbitra-
tor said.
The arbitrator also found that
the TSDC couldn't fault Gardner
for not discovering the injured
inmate. He checked the cell and
didn't notice anything amiss, and
neither did his colleague or the
next shift 30 minutes later.
The arbitrator determined that
Gardner distracting himself with
his cellphone and a book, along
with not checking on the cov-
ered window and leaving early,
were serious misconduct but not
worthy of termination. Noting
that Gardner expressed remorse
and an understanding of the im-
portance of following policies in
the future, the arbitrator ordered
the TSDC to reinstate him with a
one-year suspension.
Reference: OPSEU and Ontario (Ministry of the Solicitor General). Barry Stephens — arbitrator. Thomas Ayers for
employer. Jane Letton for employee. Feb. 3, 2021. 2021 CarswellOnt 1412
Guard wasn't only one who didn't notice anything amiss
Technician's comments taken out of context: Union