docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
CVR College of Engineering *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
112
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
7
Uploaded by SunnyA1
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 1
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY
Student Name
Course Number and Name
Institution Name
Instructor Name
Date of Submission
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 2
Arbitration Case Summary
The Case
Ridgewood Industries v United Food & Commercial Workers Canada Local 175, 2020 CanLII 82092 (ON LA)
Parties Involved
Ridgewood Industries (“The Company”)
United Food & Commercial Workers Canada Local 175 (“The Union”)
Type of Arbitration
The arbitration was based on discipline as two of the employees for found consuming Cannabis while at work. The allegation was that the two employees in question, Jason Stephenson and Rick Kinnear were found using Cannabis in the company’s parking lot. Background
The Company has a massive factory where they produce IKEA-style flat-pack furniture. The facility can be thought of as having a north side and a south side. Panel saws, huge drills, and edge banders are only some of the heavy equipment utilized on the fabrication side, located to the north. Between the machines, there are conveyors carrying wooden components. More than three hundred people work for the firm, which stores its raw materials and finished goods in a warehouse on the south side of the plant (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020). General laborers Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Kinnear handle fabrication tasks. They do not actually operate any of the machinery they work with, but they do so in close proximity to it. Mr. Stephenson has been with the Company for 17 years, and Mr. Kinnear for 6. The Company has mounted outdoor cameras for surveillance. All parking spaces on the premises are displayed. Also included is a digital video recorder that can zoom in on the action. The organization has what it calls a "Policy"
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 3
regarding substance abuse. Both the employees in question are familiar with the provisions of
this Policy (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020).
When an employee reports working under the influence of legal or illegal drugs, alcohol, or medication, it can have a negative impact on their ability to do their jobs. "Ridgewood Industries (the "Company") is committed to promoting the health, safety, and wellness of its employees and the public. On June 19th, both the employees in question were assigned to the day shift. They had a little break between 10 and 11 in the morning. and 10:15
a.m. Around 11:45 a.m., they took a break for lunch. and 12:15 p.m. In the morning, when the
complainants were given a break, Mr. Borden, who works in a loss prevention role at the company, visited the west-facing security camera (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020). He focused on the two employees in question, who were on the opposite side of the west parking lot. The footage was very clear, according to Mr. Borden. Cars were parked in neat rows all around. From their waist up, he could see both of them. They were positioned behind the vehicle's driver’s side, with their backs to the structure. People were walking and talking among them. According to Mr. Borden's testimony, each complainant was holding a white "cigarette." Mr. Borden claimed that he was able to determine who was holding each "cigarette" based on where their index and middle fingers were. The complainants were passing around a white "joint" with their other hands. They would light the end of the "joint" on fire, put it to their lips, take a big drag, and pass it on. After puffing on the "joint," the moaners lit up their cigarettes. The "joint," as Mr. Borden put it, was rolled in a different way and had a different form than cigarettes. He claimed that he was able to determine which "joint" each complainant was holding (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020) . People who were upset were holding it between their thumb and index finger and aiming it at their palm. Since the complainants all had cigarettes in their other hands, Mr. Borden concluded that they must be passing a "joint." No one would be able
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 4
to smoke two cigarettes at once. Mr. Borden said two "joints" were smoked by the complainants. He claimed that the complainants, upon finishing their second "joint," discarded the roach on the ground and continued back into the structure. According to Mr. Borden's testimony, no one among the complainants lit up and passed cigarettes. In his observation, he came across zero fireworks (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020) . The issue was immediately informed to the Plant Manager Andre Menard, who subsequently brought it to the notice of Ann Dore, the HR manager of the company. Eventually, both the employees in question were issued suspension orders. Union Argument
No one disputes that Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Kinnear were standing around Mr. Stephenson's automobile while smoking and exchanging an item. The core disagreement centers on the object itself. Since the video and the roach were found, the company has stuck to its story that it was a joint. However, the Union insists that it was a cigar being passed around to light the fireworks. While does not condone drug or alcohol use or the Company's right to penalize workers who violate the Policy. In these conditions, a 5-day sentence is appropriate (Suffield & Gannon, 2019). This would prevent grievers. A harsher punishment would not dissuade them. The Company's Smoking Policy serves a purpose unconnected to this incident. To warrant the grievers' tough discipline, there must have been urgent health and safety issues. The company failed to show actual impairment. The company
did not check if the grievers were disabled.
Management Argument
As soon as they were caught using cannabis on company premises, the company seriously considered terminating their employment for violating its Drug and Alcohol Policy. Instead, Ms. Dore pointed to the collective agreement's Letter of Understanding's smoking policy (the "Smoking Policy") (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020).
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 5
First-time offenders who smoke in prohibited areas face a five-week suspension under the policy (Suffield & Gannon, 2019). Upon carefully examining the sequence of events, the company suspended the accusers after an investigation found that they had violated the company's Drug and Alcohol Policy.
Arbitrator’s Analysis and Decision
After carefully considering the parties' submissions on penalty, the arbitrator determined that it would not be just and acceptable to adopt another penalty for the suspensions. The demonstrated culpable wrongdoing of using cannabis on Company premises against the policy is serious for health and safety reasons. The grievers violated this policy requirement, which led to their suspension (CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute., 2020). The company did not suspend impaired grievers. Therefore, it was not required to prove impairments to support suspensions. After evaluating the evidence and the arguments of the parties involved, the arbitrator found that Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Kinnear used cannabis on the premises of the Company, while they were on their morning break on June 19. Further, it was determined that substituting another penalty for suspensions would not be equitable and reasonable.
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 6
References
CanLII, the Canadian Legal Information Institute. (2020, October 26). Ridgewood Industries v United Food & Commercial Workers Canada Local 175, 2020 CanLII 82092 (ON LA)
. Canlii.org; CanLII. https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2020/2020canlii82092/2020canlii82092.html
Suffield, L., & Gannon, G. L. (2019). Labour relations
. Pearson Canada Inc.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
ARBITRATION CASE SUMMARY 7