CANADIAN
RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION
& DISPUTE RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 3987
Heard in
Concerning
CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
and
TEAMSTERS
MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES DIVISION
DISPUTE:
Dismissal of Mr. J. Myles.
JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
On January 12m, 2010, the grievor, Mr. J. Myles, was assessed with 20 demerits for his involvement in the derailment of a ballast regulator. In addition, he was dismissed from Company service for an accumulation of demerits. A grievance was filed.
The
The
The Company
denies the Union’s contentions and declines the
FOR THE
(SGD.) WM. BREHL (SGD.) M. GOLDSMITH
PRESIDENT LABOUR RELATIONS OFFICER
There appeared on behalf of the Company:
M. Goldsmith –
Labour Relations Officer,
K. Hein –
Manager, Labour Relations,
M. Thompson –
Labour Relations Officer,
B. Lockerby –
Labour Relations Officer,
And on behalf of the
Wm. Brehl –
President,
D. Brown –
Counsel,
S. Brighton – Local Chairman, Revelstoke
AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR
The material confirms that the grievor has experienced a series of rules violations which caused the accumulation of seventy-five demerits, resulting in his termination. Virtually all of the discipline was incurred for negligence or safety related infractions. In May of 2009 he was given ten demerits for having pulled away a rail another employee was grinding while he was operating his speed swing. In June of 2009 he was assessed a further ten demerits for violating the rule against the use of a personal cell phone while operating a speed swing. In September of 2009 he damaged an AEI reader, for which he was assessed five demerits. In November of 2009 he was given ten demerits for running the engine of a ballast regulator which was low on engine oil. Subsequently he was assessed a further twenty demerits for a second violation of the prohibition against the use of a cell phone while at work.
The culminating
incident, which resulted in the assessment of twenty demerits and the grievor’s
termination for the accumulation of demerits, involved his having derailed a
ballast regulator by inadvertently contacting a derail on
It is clear
that the Company is correct in characterizing the grievor as an employee who
has recorded an unacceptable series of mishaps and rule violations with safety
dimensions that caused considerable concern. There is, however, a mitigating
dimension which is raised by the
In the
Arbitrator’s view this is an appropriate case to grant the employee a second
chance. The fact that he was able to work discipline free for a substantial
period of years would suggest that the unfortunate series of event in 2009 was,
as the
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. The twenty demerits shall be removed from his record and suspension for the period between his termination and his reinstatement shall be substituted.
ARBITRATOR