HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-1267MCKINNON96_10_11
-
CJNTARIO EMPLOYES DE LA OOURONNE
CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L ONTARIO
1111 GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE
,
SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS
180 DUNDAS STREET WEST SUITE 2100 TORONTO ONTARIO '1150 /Z8 TELEPHONEITEUiPHONE (4161 326-1388
180 RUE DUNDAS OUEST BUREAU 2100 TORONTO (ONTARIO) M50 IZ8 FACSiMILE ITELECOPIE 4 J6) 326-1396
GSB # 1267/94
OPSEU # 94E344
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
OPSEU (McKinnon)
Grievor
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of the Solicitor General &
Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE R J Roberts Vice-Chairperson
FOR THE A Ryder
GRIEVOR Counsel
Ryder, Wright, Blair & Doyle
Barristers & Solicitors
FOR THE J Benedict
EMPLOYER J F Benedict Dispute Resolution Services Inc
HEARING June 1, 1995
January 16, 22, 29, 1996
July 16, 1996
1
AWARD
I. Introduction
In thIS arbItratIOn, the gnevor, a correctIOnal officer at the Metro East DetentIOn Centre,
complamed that hIS health and safety were unreasonably compromIsed by certam actIons of hIS
manager m an mCIdent that occurred durmg a routme cell mspectIon. When the response of the
employer to these actIOns was, m the opImon of the gnevor, madequate he filed the gnevance
leadmg to the present proceedmg For reasons whIch follow, the gnevance 1S d1smIssed.
II. The Evidence
The wItnesses who appeared at the heanng gave verSIOns of the mC1dent that m some cases
vaned WIdely from one to the other For thIS reason, It wIll be necessary to set out m some detaIl
the eVIdence of several of these wItnesses The wItnesses who testIfied on behalf of the umon
were the gnevor Mr M. J McKmnon, and the mmate who was mvolved m the mCIdent, Mr
Irvme Forest. The wItnesses who testIfied on behalf of the employer were the Floor Manager
who was mvolved m the mCIdent, Ms. Lmda Ashley a casual correctIOnal officer who was
-
I
-
present dunng the IncIdent, Mr Aaron Walden, a correctlOnal officer who worked In the
segregatlOn uOlt of the InstltutlOn at the time of the IncIdent, Mr Garv Peck, the Floor Manager
who took Mr Forest to segregatlOn, Mr Errol ReId, the 0 M 14 supervIsor who took Mr Forest's
statement after the IncIdent, Mr Devanand Makudal, and, the then SeOlor AssIstant
Supenntendent at Metro East, Mr Joe DeFranco The eVIdence of all of the witnesses except
Mr Makudm w1l1 be revIewed.
(1) The Witnesses for the Union
The Grievor, Mr M. J McKinnon
Mr McKInnon testified that he was a C02 at the Toronto East DetentlOn Centre, although he
was currently "act1Og" 10 an 0 M. 16 supervIsory posltlon. He had consIderable expenence at
Metro East, hav10g commenced employment there 10 1977 Pnor to that, he had some education
In correctIOns, hav10g commenced attend10g CentennIal College 10 ItS CorrectlOnal Workers'
Program and graduat10g WIth a dIploma 10 RecreatlOnal LeadershIp after sWltch10g 1Oto that
program.
AccordIng to Mr McKInnon the 10Cldent 10 questlOn happened on June 15, 1994, when he and
Mr Aaron Walden were assIgned to be the correctlOnal officers on the 4 C West UOlt. ThIS uOlt
housed 18 male 1Omates. TheIr cells opened Into a large day room, whIch had several plCOlC
tables at whIch the Inmates could SIt and watch televlslOn, play cards, etc About SIX or seven of
.
3
these Inmates were black.
At about 945 a.m. Just after the Inmates had been fed and the cleanup had been completed, Ms
Lmda Ashley the manager m charge of thIS and other umts, arnved. She announced that she
wIshed to mspect the cells m the umt. Accordmg to Mr McKinnon, these cell mspectlOns were
conducted routmely but randomly They were for the purpose of checkmg for cleanlmess,
contraband, alcohohc beverages, damage to the cell or the tOIlet, and the presence of anythmg
that mIght be used as a weapon. Durmg a cell mspectlOn, the inmates normally stood by the
doors to theIr cells
Followmg the routme normally used dunng cell mspectlOns, Ms Ashley and Mr McKinnon
entered the day room and closed the door behmd them. Mr Walden remamed outsIde and acted
as " cover" for the two of them at the gnlle door He stood close to an emergency button that he
could push m case anythmg went wrong Accordmg to Mr McKinnon, Ms Ashley was m a
hurry to get mSlde
As soon as Ms Ashley got mSide, Mr McKinnon Said, she started yellmg at inmate Forest and
told him that he was on a misconduct. When Mr Forest asked why, Ms Ashley yelled back,
"you know what for" Then, Ms. Ashley confronted Mr Forest face-to-face, yellmg at him, "vou
know what you're on a misconduct for I've talked to you about thiS before!" It seemed that Mr
Forest, who was black, had an elastic band around hIS goatee He had prevlOusly been warned by
Ms Ashley that elastIc bands were contraband and could not be used even for groommg
-
4
purposes
Whe.n testIfYing upon dIrect eXaminatiOn, Mr McKinnon said that at thIS time Ms Ashley went
nght up Into the Inmate's face She pulled the elastic band from hIS goatee Mr Forest then
became Incensed and responded, "vou're harassing me!" Ms Ashley yelled back, "you're on a
mIsconduct'" The whole tone Mr McKinnon said, was yellmg
Upon cross-exammatiOn, however Mr McKInnon was not so sure that Ms Ashley pulled the
elastIC band from Mr Forest's goatee He saId, "lIstemng to the eVIdence thIS mornmg, I'm not
sure I am sure that she tugged at hIS goatee I am sure that she yanked on It. She was very
agItated."
At thIS time Mr McKInnon went on, the other Inmates were stIrrmg and starting to yell out
comments Upon cross-exammatIOn, he Said that these comments bUIlt up to Include refernng to
Ms Ashley as a "pussy clot", a slang term used by a lot of Jamaican Inmates, and a bItch -- as
well as other epIthets m dIfferent languages and dIalects.
The crecendo m these comments was reached, accordmg to Mr McKmnon, Just after another
exchange between Ms Ashley and Mr Forest. As he and Ms. Ashley were leavmg the umt to
take Mr Forest to segregatiOn, he saId, Mr Forest turned to Ms. Ashley and saId m an
argumentatIve tone "you're puttmg me a mIsconduct because I'm black." Ms Ashley then went
up mto Mr Forest's face agam, and replied, " that's nght, you're on a mIsconduct because vou're
5
black."
Upon. cross-eXaminatIOn. Mr McKInnon said that at thIS pOint hIS OpinIOn was that Ms Ashlev
was provoking a confrontatIOn. The Inmates began moving from the doors of theIr cells toward
them, Ignonng Mr McKInnon's orders to stay where they were They began yellIng, " keep vour
hands to yourself' and "what's your name, what's your name!" Mr McKInnon testIfied that he
became concerned for hIS own and Ms Ashley's personal safety He felt sure that a phvsIcal
confrontatIOn was gomg to develop between staff and Inmates He'd seen confrontatIons develop
wIth less provocatIOn in the past. In hIS opmIOn, If Ms. Ashley had been a male, It would have
been bloody
As soon as he and Ms Ashley had left the day room and were in the COrrIdor outsIde, Mr
McKInnon said, the Inmates rushed to the gnlle door to see what was gOing on. He said that he
saw them do It, that everyone m the COrrIdor could see the door rattlIng and hear the Inmates
yellIng He had no doubt that Ms Ashley and Mr Walden would have seen thIS
MeanwhIle, m the COrrIdor the angry exchange between Ms. Ashley and Mr Forest continued
According to Mr McKInnon, Mr Forest kept inSISting that he was being harassed. Ms. Ashley
kept yelling, "I told you about thIS before, I told you about thIS before It's a mIsconduct. You're
gOing down to segregatIOn!"
Mr McKInnon agreed upon cross-exammatIOn that Inmates who were placed on mIsconduct
-
6
raised their VOices, swore at the correctIOnal officers. made their own accusatIons against
correctIOnal officers, and became argumentative In his view however Ms Ashley had tossed a
grenade" Into the Unit. Upon re-eXaminatIOn, he Said that Inmates would take any little thing and
use It as a crutch to support defiant conduct that might even develop Into notous conduct down
the line
The argument between Ms. Ashley and Mr Forest continued In the inactIve area, which was an
area between the east and west SIdes of the Unit that was used for VISItS, recreatIOn, etc Ms
Ashley and Mr Forest continued to yell at each other nose-to-nose At thIS tIme, Mr McKinnon
Said, he was covenng along WIth Mr Walden. Then, Ms Ashley adVIsed them that she was
gOing to get someone else She left the inactIve area and went Into the Unit office next door to use
the telephone When she dId so, Mr McKmnon SaId, Mr Forest was still very upset. He became
\\-omed that he and Mr Walden would become the focus ofMr Forest's anger
A short tIme later, Mr Errol ReId, an OM14 supervIsor amved on the Unit. He entered the
inactIve area and took Mr Forest down to segregatIOn. As Mr ReId was leaVing WIth Mr Forest,
Mr McKinnon saId upon cross-eXaminatIOn, Mr Forest was yelhng at Ms Ashley Mr
McKinnon, Mr Walden and Ms Ashley then returned to the west SIde of the Unit to continue the
cell inspectIOn.
According to Mr McKinnon, he and Ms Ashley entered the day room and completed the
mspectlOn Without mCIdent. Then, Just before leav mg. Ms Ashley turned to all of the Inmates
-
7
and saId, "guys, I can be firm and fair or I can be a real bItch." Mr McKlllnon said that she made
thIs statement III "kllld of a smIrky tone" He felt she was puShlllg her luck. She was agitated and
was gIVlllg the Inmates a message that she was III charge When a couple of black Inmates
wanted to know her name, she replIed, "Ashley"
As the v were leavlllg the UnIt, Mr McKlllnon saId, he asked Ms Ashley to accompany hIm to
the office After Shuttlllg the door for pnvacy, he saId to her "you're the manager, but don't ever
put me III that pOSItIon agalll." He told her that It was a breach of secunty To Mr McKlllnon's
surpnse Ms. Ashley responded, "well, I refer to myself as a bItch." He responded that apparently
hIS message was not gettlllg through to her Mr McKlllnon explallled III hIS eVIdence that he was
looklllg for a recognItIOn that she had endangered hIS health and safety and had made a major
error that was uncalled for He then adVIsed Ms. Ashley that he would be proceedlllg WIth a
complalllt about her conduct. He dId so III the form of an occurrence report. He dId not file a
grIevance at that tIme
Upon cross-examlllatIOn, Mr McKmnon Said that If Ms Ashley had acknowledged to hIm that
she had used lllappropnate racIal termlllology that had endangered hIS health and safety, as well
as the securIty of all the lIves lllvolved, he would not have proceeded WIth a complalllt. Instead,
all that he got was an acknowledgment that she referred to herself as a bItch.
When he returned to hIS dutIes III the UnIt, Mr McKlllnon Said, the Inmates were upset but gave
no dIfficultv to hIm or hIS partner Some were talklllg about contactlllg the Ombudsman. To do
~~
8
thIS, Mr McKInnon explamed, the Inmates fill out a request for an Ombudsman letter The
request then goes to the t100r superVIsor who on that day was Ms Ashley The Inmate then IS
gIven a blue form letter to till out that folds mto an envelope The request and letter are
documented m a book WIth the Inmate's name, number and date When he mspected thIS book.
Mr McKInnon Said, he noted that on June 15 , Mr Forest requested such a letter
Over the followmg penod of tlme Mr McKInnon Said, he repeatedly asked Mr Joe DeFranco
the semor aSSIstant supenntendent at Metro East, what was bemg done regardmg hIS report upon
Ms Ashley's mIsconduct. He even asked for a pnvate meetmg WIth the MmIster of CorrectIOns.
The mformatIOn he receIved was that the matter was bemg dealt WIth by the supenntendent.
Accordmg to Mr McKInnon, he wanted the employer to conduct a full mvestIgatIOn mto what
had transpIred, touchmg on the Issues of raCIsm, secunty and profeSSIOnal mIsconduct. Instead"
the employer tned -- as always, m hIS opmIOn -- to sanItlze the mCIdent and make excuses for
theIr direct or mdlrect raCIsm. The Issue of raCism was of particular concern to him, Mr
McKInnon said, because he was of natIve CanadIan ancestry
When the employer failed to give hIm the response he was lookmg for, Mr McKmnon Said, he
deCIded to gneve ThIS was a senous Issue, m hIS opmIOn, and management det1ected their
responsIbIlity to address the health and safety Issue As far as he was concerned, Mr McKInnon
Said, there was a hiStOry of raCIsm at Metro East and a deflectIOn of responsIbIlitv by semor
admmIstratIOn for thIS raCIsm.
9
The Inmate, Mr Irvine Forest:
At the tIme he testIfied, Mr Forest was an Inmate In the federal pemtentIary at JovcevIlle He
was servIng an eighteen year term for attempted murder and concurrent sentences for other
convictIOns He left Metro East on May 12, 1995
AccordIng to Mr Forest, about a week or two before the IncIdent In questIOn, Ms Ashley told
him to take a rubber band from hIS goatee He said that before she dId thIS, she had called hIm
Inside hIS cell to show hIm some tOIlet paper that was stuck m the air vent. When she told hIm to
remove It, he replIed that he dId not put It there At that, she yelled, "get outsIde, you're on a
misconduct'" They proceeded to the comdor outsIde the day room. Once they were there, she
turned to hIm and said, "pnsoner, when I'm talkmg to you don't backtalk me!" Then, she came up
mto hIS face and shouted, "get that rubber band from your goatee!" He complIed but dId not
reply Ms. Ashley then shouted m hIS face, "dId you fuckmg hear me!" Then she saId, "get the
fuck mSIde," meanmg mSIde the day room. He went back mSlde and she left.
As to the mCIdent m questIon, Mr Forest confirmed that It occurred on June 15 1994 He saId
that Ms Ashley came mto the range wIth Mr McKinnon. ("The range" was the term used to
Indicate the area that mcluded the day room and the cells) Once agam, he had a rubber band on
hiS goatee When Ms Ashley saw thIS, she said, "vou, you're stIll weanng the rubber band. Get
outsIde' You're on mIsconduct!" She was very aggressIve and screammg In a hIgh-pitched tone
-
10
of VOlce Her VOlce was very loud. Every one could hear her
Mr Forest said he took Ms Ashley's directiOn to mean that he was to get outside the range He
had to abandon his efforts to retneve his personal belongmgs from his cell and proceed toward
the gnlle door Whlle he did so, Ms. Ashley came nght up mto his face and grabbed at his goatee
as if to pull the rubber band off He could not recall whether the band came off at that pomt or he
was the one who took it off
Accordmg to Mr Forest, he then went outside the range He said that he was upset and was
cursmg m Jamaican. Then, Ms Ashley came outside She came nght up mto hIS face as If she
wanted to do somethmg to hIm. She was shakmg and screammg at hIm. Mr Forest SaId that
because of her behaViOr, he was sure that another mmate who was not as composed as he was
would have eIther pushed her or hIt her
At that pomt, Mr Forest contmued, he told Ms. Ashley that if she touched him. he would charge
her With assault. Ms Ashley got angry and started to pace, lookmg m Mr McKInnon's dIrectiOn
as if she wanted hIm to do somethmg to Mr Forest. That, Mr Forest testified, was when he SaId
to Ms Ashley, "I know why you're domg thIS to me Because I'm black." Ms Ashley rephed,
"yes, because you're black." She then went mSIde the office by the mactlve area to make a
telephone call
Upon cross-exammatiOn, Mr Forest was asked 'W hether the exchange between hIm and Ms
11
Ashley about his being charged because he was black occurred in the day room He replied, "yes
Sir I was not in the cell area but the day area."
L\ few minutes after Ms Ashley made the telephone call, Mr Forest said. a Sergeant came and
took him to segregatiOn. Upon cross-exanunatiOn, Mr Forest descnbed thiS Sergeant as a tall
black man. When asked whether he recalled telhng thiS Sergeant that he the Sergeant. was
picking on him, Mr Forest replied, "no sir" When asked whether he recalled tellIng a Mr Peck.
the correctiOnal officer supervlSlng him in segregatiOn, that the officer who took him to
segregatiOn was picking on him, Mr Forest replIed, "No Never Absolutely incorrect."
After he was placed in segregatiOn, Mr Forest testified, he telephoned the office of the
Ombudsman to file a complaint. An investigator from thiS office named James Nicholas returned
hiS call He instructed Mr Forest to wnte an Ombudsman letter and send it to him. Mr Forest
did so but, he Said, he was unsure whether the office of the Ombudsman ever got hiS letter
because nothing was being done and he later felt that repnsals were starting to affect him These
repnsals were directed agamst him, he said, because he was regarded as a troublemaker
Upon cross-eXaminatiOn, Mr Forest agreed that he had been in segregatiOn about three times
before On one occaSiOn, he Said, he was alleged to have been in a fight With another inmate On
another occaSiOn, he was sent to segregatiOn for refuSing an order On the third occaSiOn, he was
sent to segregation for allegedly being part of a group of inmates who beat another inmate on the
range He remarked, "there were qUite a few times I was there in segregatiOn."
12
When asked what he expected from the Ombudsman, Mr Forest said that he told the
Ombudsman he was very concerned about the mIsconducts on hIS record. He claImed that he was
not told that a rubber band was contraband and never saw any regulatIOn posted to that effect. To
hIS knowledge he said, he dId not refuse a dIrect order The first tIme that he was ordered to take
the rubber band off hIS goatee, he dId. Ms. Ashley, he saId, dId not say that the rubber band was
contraband or that he was not to put It back on. He wanted the mIsconduct erased from hIS record
and an InvestIgatIOn of the conduct ofMs Ashley toward hIm, In that she used abusIve profane
language toward hIm and pulled on hIS beard, WhICh he belIeved constItuted an assault. She also
confirmed hIS theory that the reason she dId thIS was because he was black.
Many Inmates, Mr Forest said, used rubber bands to groom theu hair and beards No guard ever
said to take them off He felt that Ms. Ashley had unfaIrly targeted hIm The only reason that he
could see for been sIngled out by her were complaInts that he had prevIOusly made to the
Ombudsman.
(2) The Witnesses for the Employer"
The Floor Manager, Ms. Linda Ashley
Ms Ashley testIfied that she was currently the OperatIons Manager at Metro East. At the tIme of
the InCIdent, June 15, 1994 she was a Floor Manager, supervISIng twelve correctIOnal officers It
.
13
was noted m the course of her testImony that her normal speakmg VOIce was qUite loud.
Accordmg to Ms Ashley a week before the mCIdent, on June 9, 1994 she notIced dunng a cell
mspectIOn that Mr Forest and another black Inmate who was a fnend of hIs, Mr Forester had
elastIc bands around theIr goatees She told them to remove the elastICS They removed the
elastics and gave them to her She explamed that elastics were not allowed because they were not
Issued to Inmates ThIS, she saId, was a warnmg She usually gave warnmgs to Inmates before
domg somethmg more senous such as chargmg them WIth mIsconducts
Ms Ashley explamed that any Item that was not Issued to an Inmate upon admIssIOn to the
mstItutIon was conSIdered to be contraband. For thIS reason, an elastic band was conSIdered to be
contraband. Upon cross-exanunatIOn, she acknowledged that other correctIOnal officers and
supervIsors knew thIS was so but some allowed elastIC bands to be worn. She sard, however, that
the Inmates were aware that If she told them to remove a contraband elastIC band, they'd better be
sure to keep It removed when she was present.
In the course of thIS cell mspectIOn, Ms. Ashley sard, she found Mr Forest's cell to be filthy She
called hIm m to pomt out thmgs that had to be done Mr Forest, who, she sard, had no respect for
authonty, became abUSIve and rude
Turnmg to the mCIdent that occurred on June 15 Ms Ashley saId that upon entenng the day
room, she notIced that Mr Forest once agam had an elastic band around hIS goatee She told hIm
-
14
that he was bemg placed on a misconduct for the elastic around hiS goatee as she had previOusly
warned him about this Upon cross-exammatiOn, Ms Ashley said that when she told Mr Forest
thIS, .she raIsed her vOIce but dId not yell She did so she saId, because a mIsconduct IS a very
serIous thing and when placmg someone on a misconduct, a correctiOnal officer dIdn't Just say In
a smg-song VOice, "Johnny I'm gOing to charge you."
Mr Forest, Ms Ashley Said, then got aggressive and angry As he moved toward the gnlle door
he took the elastic from hiS goatee She never made any effort to remove the elastic band herself
and never touched him m any way When Mr Forest got to the pomt where she and Mr
McKmnon were standing, he gave the elastiC band to her They turned to escort him out mto the
comdor As they neared the grIlle door Mr Forest stopped and Said to her "vou're fucking
chargmg me because I'm black!" He was both phYSically and verbally aggressive To thiS, Ms
Ashley Said, she rephed, "yeah"
Upon cross-eXaminatIOn, Ms Ashley said that when Mr Forest accused her of charging him
because he was black, he knew that wasn't so Her opmlOn was that he Said thiS to "get the umt
gomg" because over 50 percent of the Inmates were black. In thiS sense, she Said, It was not a
true allegatiOn of racism. Mr Forest was only usmg thiS allegatIon as a first lme of defence He
knew that the real reason he was bemg charged was for dIsobeymg a lawful order of an officer
Accordmg to Ms Ashley, she rephed "yeah" to Mr Forest's allegatIOn of raCIsm to calm the umt
Mr Forest, she Said. was Just showmg off by veilIng about the mIsconduct bemg because he was
.
15
black. He expected some response from the other Inmates She thought that agreeIng wIth hIm
would cut short the argument by depnvIng hIm of anyone to argue wIth. As It was, Ms Ashley
saId, the other Inmates dId not react. They dId not say anythIng At no tIme dId she feel that
anyone's health or safety was put at nsk.
Once she and Mr McKInnon had escorted Mr Forest Into the corndor Ms Ashley saId, they
took hIm to the Inactlve area. He was stIll agItated and angry but calmer than he had been In the
umt. When they arrIved, she had another manager Mr Errol ReId, come up to take Mr Forest to
segregatIOn. Mr ReId escorted Mr Forest to segregatIOn alone Mr Forest was not placed In any
restraInts.
Less than five mInutes later, Ms. Ashley SaId, she and Mr McKInnon reentered the umt to
complete the cell InSpectIOn. Mr McKInnon dId not VOIce any concerns as they returned to the
range nor dId he object to reentenng the umt. The Inmates were fine They dId not react. They
were cooperatIve and never SaId anythIng to her about the InCIdent dunng the course of the
inspectIOn. Upon cross-eXamInatIOn, Ms. Ashley SaId that she belIeved that the fact that Mr
McKInnon reentered the umt WIth her to complete the InSpectIOn IndIcated that, lIke her, he dId
not see the InCIdent as haVIng created a dangerous SItuatIOn.
Ms Ashley agreed that after the cell InSpectIOn was completed, Mr McKInnon asked her Into hIS
office and told her not to put hIm In that posItlon agaIn. She SaId that she understood that he was
saVIng that she should never have saId "yeah" to an allegatIOn of raCIsm from a black Inmate In
16
front of other black mmates. Her reply was, "I dIdn't mean anythmg by It, OK')" Ms Ashley
explamed m her testImony that she saId thIS because she knew the real reason why she sard
"veah" She sard that she would do the same thmg agam.
Toward the end of her eVIdence upon dIrect exammatIon, Ms Ashley was asked If she agreed
wIth a number of statements that Mr McKmnon made m hIS occurrence report and hIS eVIdence
As to these she demed that she entered the umt yellmg at Mr Forest. In fact, she demed that she
ever yelled at Mr Forest. She demed that she told Mr Forest that he knew what he was bemg
charged for She saId that she told hIm he was on a mIsconduct for the elastIc on hIS goatee
Ms Ashley also demed that she even waved her hand by Mr Forest's chm. She sard that she used
her hands a lot when she talked to anyone and she may have pomted m Mr Forest's dIrectIOn
when she saId that he was on mIsconduct. As to contmumg the argument m the mactIve area, she
sard that she could not remember
Ms Ashley vIgorously demed that after completmg the cell mspectIOn she made any statement to
the Inmates that she could be firm and faIr or a real bItch. She saId she never would ever make a
statement lIke that. In thIS case, she added, there was no need because the cleanup made by the
Inmates was very ImpressIve She even made a notatIOn to that effect m the log book. Ms Ashley
also demed telling Mr McKmnon that she referred to herself as a bItch. She saId that she was
msulted that Mr McKmnon concluded that she couldn't comprehend hIS message
17
The Grievor's Partner, Mr Aaron Walden
Mr Walden testItied that he had worked at Metro East DetentiOn Centre as an unclassIfied
correctiOnal officer smce March, 1993 On the day m questiOn, June 15 1994 he was assIgned to
be the gnevor's partner
Accordmg to Mr Walden, Ms. Ashley arrIved by herself to mspect the 4 C West umt. She asked
hIm and Mr McKmnon to accompany her He let Mr McKmnon and Ms Ashley mto the umt
and then locked the door behmd them.
He recalled that the llunate, Mr Forest, was standmg at the centre of the day room. Ms. Ashley
looked over at hIm and said that he was on a mIsconduct. Mr Forest replIed wIth words to the
effect that he was bemg pIcked on because he was black. ThIS reply was made m a raIsed VOIce
whIle Ms Ashley was nght m front of hIm. He dId not hear whether Ms. Ashley made any
response Then, Ms. Ashley told Mr Forest that on a previOUS occaSiOn she had told hIm to
remove the elastIc band from hIS goatee and that If she saw hIm wIth It agam she'd place hIm on
mIsconduct.
Upon cross-exammatiOn, Mr Walden saId that the elastIc band was removed from Mr Forest's
goatee m the umt. He said that he belIeved that Ms Ashley asked for It. He dId not recall whether
she reached out for It but dId recall that he saw Mr Forest remove the elastIc from hIS beard.
18
While thlS mCident was gomg on, Mr Walden said, all of the other inmates m the umt were
aware of what was happenmg They were Just standmg and watchmg Thev were not reactmg but
merely cunous When Mr Forest was removed from the umt, they went back to playmg cards
and readmg the newspaper He dld not see any inmates approach the gnlle as he was lockmg it.
When asked whether he felt threatened at any tlme, Mr Walden rephed that he dld not. He Said
that he was near the blue emergency button outslde the gnlle whlle Mr McKmnon and Ms.
Ashlev were mSlde the umt. Dunng the mCldent, he Said, he never had any thought of pushmg it.
Whlle Mr Forest was angry about bemg placed on mlsconduct and Ms. Ashley was agltated, Mr
Walden sald, he dld not beheve that Mr Forest had to be restramed once he was outslde the umt.
He walked under hlS own power When Mr Reld came to take Mr Forest down to segregatlOn,
he dld so by hlmself Mr Walden dld not recall seemg Mr Forest bemg restramed m any way
Mr Gary Peck.
Mr Peck testlfied that he had been a correctlOnal officer at Metro East smce October, 1990 In
that tlme, he had worked a lot m the segregatlon umt. On the day m questlOn, June 15, 1994, he
was workmg m the medlcal segregatlOn umt on the day Shlft. Inmates went to segregatlOn, he
Said, for mlsconducts, thelr own health or safety or upon thelr own request based upon mCldents
that occurred around them. The segregatlOn umt, Mr Peck added, was also the medlcal umt.
.
19
When shown an IncIdent report that he had wntten on June 15 1994 and In whIch he had stated
that once Mr Forest was secured In a cell he sard "that OM 14 ReId was pIckIng on hIm," Mr
Peck could not remember WrItIng the report. He sard, however that If he wrote a report savmg
that Mr Forest clarmed he had been pIcked on by Mr ReId, Mr Forest must have sard that a
number of tImes Upon cross-eXamInatIOn, Mr Peck agreed that he would not have WrItten thIS
report unless someone had asked hIm to do so He sard that the fact that an Inmate complamed
was not usually a reason for wntmg a report.
Mr Errol Reid
Mr ReId testIfied that he was currently the Secunty Officer at Metro East, and was In charge of
ensurIng that the operatIons and procedures In the InstItutIOn complIed wIth the need for secunty
At the tIme of the mCIdent m questIOn, he saId, he was a Sergeant or Floor Manager lIke Ms.
Ashley He had been at Metro East for almost 18 years and had spent hIS whole career there
On the day of the mCIdent, he saId, he was paged by Ms Ashley, who Informed hIm that he had
to take an Inmate to segregatIOn. When he reported to the umt, Ms. Ashley Informed hIm that Mr
Forest was the Inmate who had to be escorted to segregatIOn because she was placmg hIm on a
mIsconduct.
When he spoke wIth Mr Forest, Mr ReId saId, Mr Forest claImed that Ms. Ashley was pIckmg
on hIm because he was black. He also recalled that as he was escortmg Mr Forest down to
20
segregatIOn, Mr Forest claimed that he Mr ReId, was plckmg on hIm too because he had
removed hIm from a umt wIth no real reason to do so
Mr ReId stated that he dId not have any sense that he was m danger whIle escortmg Mr Forest
to segregatIOn. Mr Forest was not restramed m any way When asked why Mr Forest was not m
restramts. Mr ReId replIed that whIle Mr Forest was agItated "he wasn't hostIle or anythmg lIke
that" and he dIdn't feel threatened by hIm.
Upon cross-exammatIOn, Mr ReId, who was black, stated that Mr Forest was not the only black
mmate who made that kmd of claim. He saId that he'd had a whIte mmate say to hIm that he was
pIckmg on hIm because he was whIte He added that he'd also had black Inmates say to hIm that
he was plckmg on them because they were black.
At the same tIme Mr ReId agreed upon cross-exammatIOn that the more agItated an Inmate was,
the greater the rIsk of a dIsturbance He agreed that he would be more concerned about a
dIsturbance m a day room, where the Inmates outnumber the correctIOnal officers. He Said that a
SItuatIOn could be contamed m a comdor more qUlckly than m a day room because there would
not be a whole lot of Inmates there.
Mr ReId also agreed that If a correctIOnal officer made a raCIst remark It could cause agItatIOn.
He agreed that It was not adVIsable for a correctIOnal officer mSIde a umt to make a comment that
black Inmates could perceIve as raCISt. There would be a potentIal for a dIsturbance
21
Mr Joe DeFranco
Mr DeFranco testIfied that m June, 1994 he was the Semor AssIstant Supenntendent,
CorrectlOns, at Metro East. He was responsIble mdlrectly for all correctlOnal staff It was part of
hIS Job to conduct the mvestlgatlOn mto the gnevor's report regardmg the conduct of Ms Ashley
In carrvmg out thIS responsIblhty he receIved and revIewed mCldent reports submItted by Mr
McKmnon, Ms Ashley Mr ReId, Mr Walden, and Mr Peck. He also receIved and revIewed a
statement by Mr Forest. On June 21, 1994, after comp1etmg thIS reVIew, Mr DeFranco
recommended to Ms DIane Doherty, the Supenntendent at Metro East, that a meetmg be
scheduled WIth Ms Ashley to determme whether dIsclplmary actlOn was warranted.
The meetmg was held on August 17, 1994 In attendance were Mr DeFranco, Mr N K. COWIe,
the Deputy Supenntendent at Metro East; Ms. Ashley; and, her representatIve, Mr D Carter, a
Umt Manager On August 23, 1984, Mr COWIe Issued the followmg memorandum to Ms
Ashley
On August 17, 1994, you met WIth the undersIgned to dISCUSS allegatlOns relatmg
to an mCldent WhICh occurred on June 15, 1994 Also present at thIS meetmg was
Mr J DeFranco, Semor ASSIstant Supenntendent, CorrectlOns and your
representatlve, Mr D Carter, Umt Manager
After carefully consIdenng the eVIdence m thIS matter I am satlsfied that the
allegatlOns have not been substantiated.
However, It IS clear, your actlOns and comments on June 15 1994 were
''1
mappropnate and unacceptable especIally from a superVISOry employee wIth your
expenence and trammg
As we dIscussed, you exercIsed poor professIOnal Judgment when you casually
dIsmIssed a complamt of racIal dIscnmmatIOn made by an mmate Your faIlure to
the take appropnate steps to address the complamt contnbuted to a perceptIOn you
have been treatmg Inmates dIfferently because of race Clearlv you had an
oblIgatIOn to address the complamt expedItIOusly, yet faIled to do so
You WIll recall we dIscussed a number of methods WhICh could have been
employed to effectIvely deal wIth the Inmate's complamt.
I trust you have benefitted from thIS counsellIng and III future wIll deal wIth
sImIlar mCIdents m a professIOnal and competent manner
Mr N K. COWIe
The gnevor was counselled for exercIsmg poor professIOnal Judgment III dealmg wIth a
complamt of racIal dIscnmmatIOn made by an Inmate
When asked whether he agreed wIth the contents of the above memorandum, Mr DeFranco saId
that he dIdn't dIsagree wIth anythmg m the document. He saId that he felt that Ms Ashley should
have responded dIrectly to the allegatIOn that she was puttmg Mr Forest on mIsconduct because
he was black. Accordmg to Mr DeFranco, Ms Ashley should have explamed to Mr Forest that
thIS was not the reason why he was bemg placed on mIsconduct. Then she should have revIewed
wIth Mr Forest once agam the reason for the charge
As to the health and safety Issue, Mr DeFranco saId that all he could say was that nothmg
happened at the time The remammg Inmates dId not get mvolved m the SItuatIOn between Mr
.
j"
--'
Forest and Ms Ashley He added that there was always an Inherent nsk of Inmates becomIng
Irate ThIS was not the way he saId, In whIch he would have handled the sItuatIon.
Upon cross-eXamInatIOn, Mr DeFranco agreed that the cell InspectIOn procedure whIle routIne,
IS one of the nsher procedures carned out by correctIOnal officers ThIS was the reason why the
StandIng Orders of the InstltutlOn reqUIred a correctIOnal officer to be outsIde the range ready to
push the pamc button should anythIng go wrong
Mr DeFranco also agreed that by not respondIng appropnately to the Inmate's allegatIOn that she
was racIst, Ms Ashley created an ImpreSSIOn of raCIsm. He confirmed that gIven the tone of
VOIce and level of agItatIOn of both Ms. Ashley and Mr Forest, Ms Ashley's response to the
allegatIOn of racIsm could not be charactenzed as a Joke
Counsel for the umon then asked Mr DeFranco whether, In hIS OpInIOn, the response of
management to Ms Ashley's mIsconduct was appropnate In the course of hIS questlOmng,
counsel remInded Mr DeFranco that Ms Ashley had testIfied that she belIeved she responded
appropnately and would do the same thIng agaIn In the same CIrcumstances Mr DeFranco
agreed that Ms Ashley apparently dId not agree wIth the assessment of Mr COWIe He refused,
however, to concede that the counsellIng was IneffeCtlve He saId that the only way In whIch he
could agree wIth thIS suggestIOn would be If Ms Ashley had actually repeated the same
behaVIOr He remmded counsel that Ms. Ashley had been an employee for a number of years, and
to hIS knowledge thIS was the first IncIdent of thIS nature In whIch she was Involved.
24
III. Findings of Fact.
From the above eVIdence, I find as a fact that when Ms Ashley entered the day room and saw the
elastIc band around Mr Forest's goatee, she became agItated and m a forceful manner nOtlfied
Mr Forest that he was bemg charged WIth a mIsconduct. It also IS found as a fact that m
response Mr Forest became upset and cursed Ms Ashley m Enghsh and hIS Jamaican dIalect
whlle followmg her dIrectIOn to leave the day room to be escorted to segregatIOn. I also find as a
fact that, contrary to Mr Forest's assertIOn m hIS eVIdence, Ms Ashley mformed hIm that he was
bemg charged because he had prevIously been warned by Ms Ashley that elastIc bands were
contraband and were not to be used by mmates
It cannot be found as a fact that m the course of the mCldent WIth Mr Forest, Ms Ashley either
grabbed at or pulled the elastIc from Mr Forest's goatee The weIght of the eVIdence does not
support thIS conclusIOn. Rather, It supports the conclusIOn that whlle Ms. Ashley mIght have
waved her arm m Mr Forest's dIrectIOn whIle mformmg hIm that he was bemg charged, she dId
not touch hIm. It must also be found as a fact that Mr Forest was the one who removed the
elastIc band from hIS beard.
Contrary to the eVIdence ofMr McKInnon, It cannot be found as a fact that the other mmates m
the day room responded to the mCIdent between Ms Ashley and Mr Forest by becommg
agItated andJOlmng Mr Forest m cursmg Ms Ashley None of the other eye WItnesses
25
corroborated thIS eVIdence Mr Forest was not asked In hIS dIrect eXaminatIOn about the reactIOn
of the other Inmates Mr McKInnon's partner Mr Walden, testIfied that the other Inmates dId
not react but \vere merely cunous He Said that when Mr Forest was removed from the Unit, they
went back to plaYing cards and readmg the newspaper Ms Ashley testIfied that the other
Inmates were fine They dId not react and were cooperatIve WIth her dunng the course of the
inSpectIOn. The overwhelmmg weIght of the eye WItness testImony supports the conclusIOn that
the other Inmates remamed calm and dId not respond to the mCIdent.
I find as a fact that as Mr Forest was bemg escorted from the day room, he turned to Ms Ashley
and saId m an aggressIve manner "you're fuckmg chargmg me because I'm black'" I also find as
a fact that mstead of denymg thIS assertIOn and explammg once agam the reason for the charge,
Ms Ashley agreed WIth Mr Forest, saymg somethmg lIke, "Yeah, because you're black." The
eVIdence also strongly supports an mference that Mr Forest dId not make thIS assertIOn because
he actually belIeved that he was bemg charged because he was black, but rather m an effort to
agItate the other black Inmates m the day room.
I find as a fact, however, that thIS effort was not successful There was no corroboratIOn by other
eye WItnesses of Mr McKInnon's claim that at thIS pomt the agItatIOn of the other Inmates
reached a crecendo and they began movmg from the doors of theIr cells toward the gnlle There
also was no corroboratIOn of Mr McKInnon's eVIdence that after he and Ms Ashley left the day
room. the Inmates rushed to the gnlle door and everyone m the comdor could see the door
rattlmg and hear the Inmates yellmg In fact, Mr Walden testified that he dId not see any
26
lI1ll1ates approach the gnlle as he was locking It behind Mr McKinnon, Ms Ashley and Mr
Forest. He also testIfied that he never felt threatened at any time and that dunng the incident he
never had anv thought of pushing the pamc button.
There seems to be httle doubt that once Ms Ashley and Mr Forest were in the corndor their
angry exchange continued. Both of them were agItated and shouting at each other There also
seems to be httle doubt that the argument between Ms. Ashley and Mr Forest continued when
they reached the mactI ve area.
It cannot be concluded, however that Mr Forest was so angry and upset that he was close to
becoming phYSically vIOlent wIth Ms Ashley or anyone else No WItness other than Mr
McKInnon seemed to thmk so Mr Walden testified that he dId not beheve that Mr Forest had to
be restramed once he was outsIde the umt. Mr Forest walked to the mactlve area under hIS own
power Mr ReId testIfied that he dId not have any sense that he was m danger whIle escorting
Mr Forest to segregatIOn. WhIle Mr Forest was agItated, he saId, he wasn't hostile and he dIdn't
feel threatened by hIm. At no time was Mr Forest placed in any restramts.
IV The Health and Safety Issue-
Counsel for the umon submItted that artIcle 18 1 of the collectIve agreement was breached
whenever a managenal decIsIon unnecessanly added to the nsk to staff m a correctIOnal
instItutIon. When the Floor Manager, Ms Ashlev conducted herself in a racIally provocatIve
,
27
manner dunng her confrontatIOn with Mr Forest In the day room, It was submitted, her conduct
breached thIS artIcle It was further submItted by counsel for the umon that artIcle 18 1 was also
breached when semor management faIled to take appropnate actIOn to correct Ms Ashley's
conduct.
Counsel for the employer submitted, on the other hand, that whIle Ms. Ashley's response to Mr
Forest's assertIOn of raCIsm was Inappropnate, It was not so severe as to nse to the level of a
breach of artIcle 18 1 of the collectIve agreement. As to the alleged Inadequacv of the response of
semor management to Ms. Ashley's conduct, It was submitted that semor management took
appropnate actIOn and as a result, dId not breach artIcle 18 1
ArtIcle 18 1 of the collectIve agreement reads as follows
18 1 The Employer shall contmue to make reasonable prOVISIOns for the safety
and health of Its employees dunng the hours of theIr employment. It IS agreed that
both the Employer and the Umon shall co-operate to the fullest extent possIble In
the preventIOn of aCCIdents and In the reasonable promotIOn of safety and health
of all employees.
Under thIS artIcle, the employer must, inter alia, make reasonable proVIsIOn to protect and
promote the safety and health of all employees
In a recent deCISIOn, Re Stewart and Ministry of Correctional Services (1994), G S B No
1916/93 (Kaplan) the Board described the burden of the umon m a gnevance under artIcle 18 1
28
of the collective agreement as follows
There IS really no dIspute about the legal standard to be appl1ed. ArtIcle 18 1
reqUlres the employer to take reasonable precautIOns for the health and safetv of
11s employees. No workplace IS perfectly safe and for ObVIOUS reasons a
correctIOnal mstItutIOn IS less safe than many Some nsk IS an ObVIOUS part of the
job And under artIcle 18 1 the gnevmg party bears the burden of provmg that the
nsk Imposed IS unnecessary or exceSSIve WhIle the Board does not reqUlre proof
of actual harm before findmg that a health and safety gnevance succeeds, It does
reqUlre cogent, dIspaSSIOnate and ObjectIve proof of a real possIbIl1ty of harm.
Id. at 25-26
The gnevmg party must show through cogent, dIspaSSIOnate and ObjectIve proof that the conduct
of management raIsed a real possIbly of harm.
In the present case, thIS burden was not met. When the eVIdence was consIdered as a whole 11 dId
not support Mr McKInnon's contentIOn that Ms Ashley's conduct raised a real possIbIl1ty of
harm to hIm or her -- or, for that matter, to any other correctIOnal staff Certamly, Mr McKInnon
perceIved that there was a real possIbIl1ty of harm, but hIS perceptIOn was not bourne out by the
other eVIdence m the case In fact, the most dramatic aspects of Mr McKInnon's eVIdence were
not corroborated, and m some cases contradIcted, by the eVIdence of the other eye WItnesses.
As a result, It could not be found as a fact (1) that other Inmates m the day room reacted angnly
to the mCIdent; (2) that Ms Ashley's affirmative response to Mr Forest's assertIOn that he was
bemg charged because he was black further enraged the other mmates, (3) that the other Inmates
began movmg toward the gnlle door m a nOISY and threatemng matter (4) that Mr Forest was
29
enraged to the pomt of becommg physIcally vlOlent, or (5) any other correctlOnal officer who
was on the scene at or dIrectly after the tlme of the mCIdent shared Mr McKInnon's perception
that there was a real posSlbIlItV of harm. When the totahtv of the eVidence IS revIewed m a
dIspasslOnate and objectIve manner the conclUSIOn becomes mescapable that Ms Ashley's
response to Mr Forest's accusatIon of raCIsm, though mappropnate, dId not nse to the level of a
breach of the health and safety proVIsIons of artIcle 18 1 of the collectlve agreement.
It follows that the response of semor management to Ms Ashley's mappropnate reply hkewlse
was not a breach of the health and safety proVIsIOns of artIcle 18 I Ms Ashley was wrong when
she saId somethmg hke, "yeah, because you're black" m response to Mr Forest's accusatIOn,
"you're fuckmg chargmg me because I'm black'" I agree WIth the eVIdence ofMr DeFranco that
casually dIsmIssmg a complamt of raCIal dIscnmmatIOn hke that constItuted an exerCIse of poor
profeSSIOnal Judgment. Even If, as here, Ms. Ashley had good reason to beheve that Mr Forest
dId not really thmk he was bemg charged because he was black, she should have explamed that
thIS was not the reason why he was bemg placed on mIsconduct. Then she should have revIewed
WIth Mr Forest the reason for the charge
As It was, Ms. Ashley was formally counselled by senior management for her exerCIse of poor
profeSSIOnal Judgment. ThIS was followed up by a letter recordmg thIS counsellmg seSSlOn, whIch
undoubtedly found ItS way mto her personnel file
Counsel for the umon submItted that thIS was not a strong enough measure to correct Ms.
30
Ashley's behavIOur because she asserted In her eVIdence that she stIll thought her reply was
appropnate, In that agreeing wIth Mr Forest's insincere charge of raCIsm depnved hIm of a baSIS
for continuing the argument. She also Said that she would do the same thing again In the same
CIrcumstances
I am mindful of the fact that thIS IS not an appeal from the deCISIon of management In the case of
Ms Ashley but rather an arbItratIOn of a health and safety gnevance filed by Mr McKInnon.
The adequacy of semor management's deCISIon In the case of Ms. Ashley IS not dIrectly at Issue
here It IS only indIrectly at Issue, In the sense of whether It was adequate to correct an alleged
health and safety VIOlatIOn created by Ms Ashley's conduct. Since It has been concluded that Ms.
Ashley's conduct dId not constltute a health and safety VIOlatIOn, the Issue of the appropnateness
of semor management's response to her conduct becomes moot.
I wIll venture to comment, however, that I agree WIth much of what Mr DeFranco Said when thIS
questIOn was put to hIm by counsel for the umon. Mr DeFranco refused to concede that semor
management's counselling effort was ineffectIve Essentlally, he saId that It was one thmg for
Ms Ashley to say that she would do the same thing agam but qUIte another for her actually to
repeat thIS behaVIOr He remmded counsel for the umon that Ms. Ashley had been an employee
for a number of years, and to hIS knowledge thIS was the first mCIdent of thIS nature m wluch she
was Involved.
31
V Conclusion
F or all of the above reasons, the gnevance is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto Ontano this lith day of October, 1996
/
A
,~M ~
''''' / ~
R. Jaclt Roberts, Vice Chair
/