Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-2057.Lord.97-03-10q m ONTARD CROWN EMPLOYEES GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD EMPLOY& LX LA CCURONNE LE L’ONTARK) COMMISSION RiiGLEMENT DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST SUITE 2100, TORONTO ON M5G 7Z8 186, RUE DUNDAS OUEST; BUREAU 2100, TORONTO (ON) M5Q lZ8 DE TELEPHONE/TffLiPHONE : (416) 326-1388 FACSIMILElTLiLt’COPIE : (416) 326-1395 BETWEEN Grievor BEFORE: FOR THE GRIEVOR FOR THE M. Gage EMPLOYER Counsel Liquor Control Board of Ontario HEARING GSB # 2057/96 OLBEU # OLB287/96 IN TEE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under TEE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD OLBEU (Lord) - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario) . Employer W. Kaplan Vice-Chairperson J. Noble Legal Counsel Ontario Liquor Boards Employees' Union March 5, 1997 . 2 Introduction In August 1996, the grievor, a Customer Service Representative employed by the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, was, on two separate occasions, recorded stealing from his employer while working at his regular cash register. The details of this theft need not concern us. Suffice it to say, that the grievor was subsequently criminally charged and dismissed from employment. A grievance was filed and proceeded to a hearing in Toronto. The evidence and positions of the parties can be readily summarized. From the employer’s perspective, it must trust its employees who deal with large amounts of cash and expensive product. The grievor had violated that trust and given that his seniority was not great, and that there was some discipline on his record, this was not, in the employer’s view, an appropriate case for reinstatement. If, however, the grievor was to be reinstated, employer counsel took the position that he should only be reinstated on the strictest possible terms; terms which employer counsel outlined. From the union and the grievor’s perspective, this was an appropriate case for reinstatement. The grievor had admitted the theft and was sincerely sorry for it. More importantly, as a result of his discharge and arrest the grievor had come to realize that he was an alcoholic and had subsequently taken real and meaningful steps to deal with his alcohol problem; steps which union counsel described. The union sought reinstatement of the grievor and did not take issue, in general, with his reinstatement on strict terms. 3 Decision Having considered the evidence and submissions of the parties, I am of the view that this is an appropriate case for reinstatement on extremely strict terms. I reach this decision for a number of reasons. The evidence establishes that at the time in question the grievor was an alcoholic but has subsequent to his discharge and arrest made real efforts - successful efforts - to deal with his alcoholism and his drug abuse. I am satisifed that the grievor’s serious misconduct resulted from his alcoholism and drug abuse and that if he continues to deal with these issues, as the evidence establishes that he has and is, the chances of his reoffending are extremely small. Moreover, and further supporting my decision to reinstate the grievor, I note that he has more than ten years of permanent full-time service with the Liquor Control Board, and has a previous and additional three years of part-time service. This seniority is not insignificant. While the grievor does have a disciplinary record, it is not a serious one. Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, the grievance is allowed subject to the following terms: 1. The grievor is reinstated on a last chance basis. 2. Any further misconduct of the kind leading to the grievor’s dismissal, namely theft of either cash or product, or any instances of the grievor attending at work under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any use of alcohol or drugs at work, will result in the grievor’s immediate dismissal. No grievance may be filed with respect to such dismissal except with respect to challenging the factual basis underlying the dismissal. 4 3. Should the grievor be dismissed pursuant to the foregoing paragraph, any grievance will proceed before me in an expedited process. 4. The grievor is currently taking antabuse and must continue taking it as a condition of his employment. Moreover, he must continue his participation in Alcoholics Anonymous as a condition of his employment. From time to time, the employer may request confirmation of his continued use of antabuse and his continued participation in Alcoholics Anonymous. Such confirmation shall be promptly provided. This condition shall remain in effect for a period of five years from the date of this award. 5. The employer may, for a period of five years from the date of this award, but not more than five times per year, and at the employer’s expense, direct the grievor to take a drug or alcohol test. Positive test results will result in the grievor’s termination and the relevant parts of paragraph 2 will apply. 6. The grievor is to be reinstated to a position in his geographic posting area on Monday, March 24, 1997. 7. Prior to his reinstatement, the grievor will provide the employer with a letter of apology for his misconduct, such letter to contain the grievor’s promise that he will not, in future, engage in any further such misconduct. 8. The grievor will make restitution to the employer within ten days of the date of this award if he has not already done so. 5 9. The sunset clause provision of the collective agreement for disciplinary records shall begin to run as of the date of the grievor’s reinstatement. The grievor’s record will be changed so as to reflect the fact that a suspension for time served was substituted for the discharge. I remain seized with respect to the implementation of this award. DATED at Toronto this 10th day of March 1997. William Kaplan Vice-Chairperson