CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION
& DISPUTE RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 3876
Heard in Calgary,
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
concerning
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY COMPANY
and
TEAMSTERS CANADA
RAIL CONFERENCE
DISPUTE:
The assessment of a discharge to Locomotive Engineer P.
Wells on February
13, 2009, for “conduct unbecoming and failure to follow
instructions and return a leased CN motor vehicle on December 25, 2008.”
UNION’S STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
On December 24, 2008,
Locomotive Engineer Wells was authorized by the Company to utilize a rental
vehicle to drive himself and his conductor from Kamloops
to Vancouver,
B.C. Due to weather conditions and the grievor’s developing medical condition,
the car was not immediately returned. After a routine traffic stop, the
vehicles was impounded, causing a further delay in its return. The Company
conducted an investigation and determined that the grievor had failed to follow
instructions and was guiltily of conduct unbecoming an employee, resulting in
Mr. Well’s discharge.
The Union’s contends the grievor failed to return the vehicle
on December 25,
2008 due to weather and medical circumstances that occurred on and
after that date and that these mitigating circumstances were not a
consideration in the decision to discharge. [sic] The Union
contends that the Company has failed to prove allegations of unbecoming conduct
that would warrant discharge. The Union
contends a violation of articles 86.1 and 86.2 given that the investigation was
not fair and impartial due to the investigations being conducted utilizing
questionable evidence and that the investigation strayed from the initial
reason for the investigation as stated in the notice to appear.
It is the Union’s position that Mr. Wells’ discipline is
unwarranted and should be expunged or, in the alternative, the discipline
should be significantly reduced. Mr. Wells should be compensated for all loss
of wages or benefits.
FOR THE UNION:
(SGD.) T. MARKEWICH
FOR: GENERAL CHAIRMAN
There appeared on behalf of
the Company:
D. Crossan – Manager,
Labour Relations, Prince George
K. Morris – Sr.
Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton
P. Payne –
Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton
There appeared on behalf of
the Union:
M. A. Church – Counsel, Toronto
B. Willows – General
Chairman, Edmonton
T. Markewich – Vice-General
Chairman, Edmonton
G. Mensaghi – Local
Chairman, Calgary
P. Wells –
Grievor
AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR
The evidence
confirms that because of highly unusual snow conditions in Vancouver
and the lower mainland on December 24, 2008, the grievor was given permission to use
a rental car to deadhead from Kamloops to Vancouver, with his crew
mate. Locomotive Engineer Wells was instructed that he should return the rental
car to the Vancouver
airport the following day, December 25, 2008. In fact the car was not returned on
December 25 and, two days later on December 27, 2008 it was impounded by the Vancouver city police from a location in downtown Vancouver described as
the three hundred block of Columbia
Street. The report provided to the Company by the Vancouver city police is
that the grievor was inside the car without a shirt on and was in the company
of a female passenger.
According to
the report obtained from the Vancouver police by
CN Constable Mark Golouch the Vancouver
police stopped the grievor in his vehicle for the investigation of possible
prostitution activity. According to the report the grievor stated that he was
going to the airport and that the female in the vehicle stated that she lived
with the grievor and that they were in the downtown area to purchase marijuana.
It is not disputed that the vehicle was impounded by the Vancouver police
because it became clear that the grievor had resided in British Columbia for
longer than three months, having previously transferred from Jasper, Alberta,
and had not obtained a British Columbia driver’s licence. Following an
investigation, the Company discharged Locomotive Engineer Wells for conduct
unbecoming and the failure to follow instructions.
At the hearing
the Company stressed the grounds for its decision. In that regard it lists the
grievor’s failure to return the vehicle as instructed, his having retained the
car for three days during which he apparently made personal use of it for a
trip to a hospital on Christmas Day, that he had an unauthorized person in the
car, that his driver’s licence was not in order and that he was involved in
what appears to have been an attempt to procure marijuana.
On the face of
it these allegations have a very serious appearance. The grievor’s explanation,
however, which the Arbitrator accepts in substantial part, sheds a different
light. Firstly, the grievor explains that the snow conditions in Vancouver were such on
December 24 that he could not physically reach the airport and that for a
period of at least two days his own car remained inaccessible in Thornton Yard.
Mr. Wells further explains that he attempted on at least two occasions to call
the Company’s supervisors to advise of the situation, but was unable to get an
answer, after which he gave up. In addition, he indicates that the person in
his vehicle was a personal friend who was assisting him in navigating the car
to the airport as he was not familiar with the route to the airport from his
home in Surrey. He also explained that he was
not wearing a shirt inside the car because he was then suffering from extremely
painful boils and lesions on his back and that part of the reason for his
friend being there was to assist him in putting on his coat. It may also be
noted that while the CN police report was provided to the grievor as part of
the record at his disciplinary investigation, no questions were put to him by
the investigating officer with respect to the statement of his companion with
respect to marijuana.
On the whole,
the Arbitrator is satisfied that while there were serious errors committed by
Locomotive Engineer Wells, and that he did place himself in what appeared to be
a compromising situation in a Company vehicle, there are mitigating factors
which would suggest that this is an appropriate case for his reinstatement.
Firstly, the employee has twenty-seven years’ service and had a clear
disciplinary record at the time of his discharge. Such discipline as he
previously received was, with one exception, entirely related to attendance issues.
It is not disputed that he was a good operating employee and has no record of
any prior misconduct. Additionally, his failure to return the vehicle as
scheduled is, in my view, sufficiently explained by the apparently
unprecedented volumes of snow which struck the Vancouver area on the days in question. I
accept his evidence that he was unable to reach his own car and that the volume
of snow made it impossible for him to return the vehicle to the airport before
December 27th. Additionally, I must accept the submission of counsel for the Union to the effect that there is no meaningful evidence
with respect to any attempt to obtain marijuana by the grievor, bearing in mind
that the report of the CN police is hearsay at best, and was not in fact
pursued in any way during the Company’s disciplinary investigation. I also
accept that he was suffering from serious lesions to his back, which required
him to visit the hospital on Christmas Day for several hours.
The grievor was
nevertheless subject to serious discipline for not having taken the necessary
steps to communicate with a Company supervisor the fact that he had retained
the car beyond the date for which its use had been authorized, that he was
using it for personal purposes and that he did have an unauthorized person with
him in the Company’s rented vehicle. The state of his driver’s licence, not
verified by the Company, is a technicality that should not cause his
termination.
In the result,
I am satisfied that this is an appropriate case for reinstatement, albeit
without compensation. The grievance is therefore allowed, in part. The
Arbitrator directs that the grievor be reinstated into his employment
forthwith, without loss of seniority and without compensation for his wages and
benefits lost.
March 15,
2010 (signed)
MICHEL G. PICHER
ARBITRATOR