An employee’s persistent mockery and intimidating conduct towards a supervisor warranted a 6-month suspension, an arbitrator has held.
The employee’s conduct included the following:
1. On one occasion, after the supervisor greeted him, the employee started hollering aggressively at him, “Oh that’s the way it’s gonna be … Hi Dan, Oh Hi Dan, How are you.” The employee continued to yell at the supervisor until he was far enough away that he could not hear him.
2. The next week, the employee was parked nearby and when he saw the supervisor, he rolled his window down and started hollering an aggressive and sarcastic greeting to him.
3. The next week, the supervisor met up with the employee who gave him a similarly aggressive greeting.
4. When the supervisor was leaving work at the end of another day, the employee drove up in a truck so that he was close to the supervisor and rolled his window down and aggressively and sarcastically greeted him.
5. On another occasion, the supervisor observed the employee see him, and said “good morning” and he replied with the aggressive greeting. The employee continued with the loud aggressive greeting until the supervisor unlocked the door to the stores area and went in.
6. Another day, the employee approached the supervisor and loudly greeted him, interrupting his conversation with another worker.
7. Lastly, on another occasion, the employee very loudly and aggressively called out to the supervisor and carried on with an aggressive and bullying greeting. This continued until the supervisor had reached the doorway that exits into a hallway.
The supervisor reported that the employee’s conduct was causing him to have trouble concentrating, he wasn’t sleeping, and his wife was concerned for their safety. He went to see his doctor and was referred for counselling.
The arbitrator found that the employee’s conduct appeared to relate to the supervisor’s efforts to bring some efficiency to an area of the company’s operations that was “in demonstrable need of change”. The employee admitted that he had been deliberately sarcastic, that he knew his conduct was unwelcome, and that he had tried to get under the supervisor’s skin. The arbitrator decided that his conduct violated the company’s violence and harassment policy.
The arbitrator stated that the employee’s conduct was “juvenile and unworthy of a 12 year old, let alone a man in his 50s. It also however had a goading, threatening quality to it.”
The arbitrator concluded, however, that the employee’s conduct was “more immature than intentionally threatening”. Also, had the supervisor warned the employee right away or reported the incidents under the violence and harassment policy (he said that he had not reported because he “did not want to make trouble” and feared how the employee would react), the employee might have changed his ways.
Given that, and the employee’s 34 years of service, the arbitrator reinstated the employee with no back pay, resulting in a six-month suspension without pay. The employee was given “one last opportunity to show he can conduct himself in a civil and respectful way in his workplace.”
Hinton Pulp, A Division of West Fraser Mills Ltd. v Unifor Local 855, 2014 CanLII 57678 (AB GAA)
