Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER September 5, 2016 NEWS 17 dealt with the television the way she did. e other dispatcher didn't see a problem since it was the work- er's mistake in not labelling the box. However, the worker accused her of theft. A short time later, in July 2002, the worker was on duty when a soldier asked him about a bag that was left in a vehicle. Someone else overheard and said the bag had been handed into dispatch ear- lier, which made the worker sus- picious that the other dispatcher had taken it. e bag was later returned to dispatch and when the worker gave it to the soldier, the soldier gave him a look that the worker took to think soldiers thought the dispatchers were thieves. e worker complained to his super- visor that the other dispatcher had stolen the bag and then returned it. e supervisor didn't do any- thing about the worker's com- plaint, so the worker took it upon himself to discuss the matter with the other dispatcher. According to the other dis- patcher, the worker came into the office, walked up behind her, then walked away and told her he had experience as a detective and she was a thief. He also said such be- haviour made all Atco employees look bad to the military. She claimed the worker acted aggressively and was trying to intimidate her, and when she sug- gested they go to the military po- lice if there was an investigation, the worker suggested he could set her up to look like a thief. e other dispatcher made a formal complaint of harassment to Atco. She said she was scared of the worker because of his behaviour towards her and had seen him act angrily and aggressively with others at the base. She checked with the military police three times to see if there was an investigation and to say she was afraid of the worker when he returned after a one- month leave. Foiled attempts at resolution When the worker returned, Atco held a meeting to discuss the ha- rassment complaint. e other dispatcher added that the worker had mentioned he had "friends that break legs and take care of problems for him." e worker denied calling her a thief or threatening her, but then acted aggressively and angrily in the meeting. e other dispatcher said she could work with the worker if she could feel safe and free from intimidation, but the worker said that didn't make sense if she was afraid of him. He finally said, "Either she goes or I go," thinking one of them could be transferred to another job at that base or another one Atco managed. Atco decided the worker was an embarrassment and a liability for the company and there were no vacancies at Camp Black Bear, so it terminated his employment on Oct. 16, 2002. e termination letter stated it couldn't rely on the worker to in- teract with fellow employees in an acceptable manner. The worker sued Atco for wrongful dismissal. He argued he was a strong performer and he made appropriate inquiries about the television and bag to avoid embarrassment for Atco, and Atco should have found another position for either himself or the other dispatcher. e case was entangled in the legal system for 12 years before reaching the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench. e court noted that Atco had to keep in mind that the other dispatcher had the right to be free from the worker's intim- idating behaviour and the worker gave Atco an ultimatum: "Either she goes or I go." is meant there could be no resolution where both employees would continue in their current employment. e court found Atco followed its policy in dealing with the com- plaint and tried to resolve the mat- ter. However, the worker was "as- sertive, bordering on aggressive and certainly not conciliatory." Atco was aware the worker had previously been offered assistance with his anger and aggressiveness and he had a previous warning about such behaviour. When he acted dismissive of the mediation process, there wasn't much Atco could do, said the court. e company also didn't have a duty to find a position for the worker elsewhere because his employment contract was for "a certain position in a certain place which the employer could not unilaterally change," said the court. Given the workplace was a small military base, the worker breached his obligations when he intimidated a co-worker with the same job and refused to work with her, said the court. e court found Atco had just cause to terminate the worker's employment. For more information see: •Turner v. Atco Frontec Corp., 2016 CarswellAlta 854 (Alta. Q.B.). Atco case entangled in legal system for 12 years MILITARY < pg. 5 your career in focus When it comes to practicing human resources, membership matters. Only HRPA offers Certified Human Resources Professional, Leader, and Executive designations: the new global standard for HR excellence and professionalism. The CHRP, CHRL and CHRE designations demonstrate an HRPA member's commitment to their career and the success of their organization. P U T Y O U R C A R E E R I N F O C U S hrpa.ca/infocus Atco didn't have a duty to find a position for the worker because his contract was for "a certain position in a certain place."

• Cover