Correctional officer fired after inmate incident, fiery email

An Ontario arbitrator has reinstated a correctional officer who was dismissed following allegations of misconduct involving an inmate and an insubordinate email to management. 

The worker was a correctional officer for the Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General since 2015, who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcoholism. In 2021, he was assigned to the Sarnia Detention Centre (SDC) in Sarnia, Ont., starting with a job-shadowing phase during which he couldn’t be assigned to a post independently. 

In June 2021, the superintendent of the SDC learned that someone had given the deputy superintendent an anonymous note saying that the worker had been talking to other staff about watching a female inmate in segregation “touch herself” a couple of months earlier on April 26. The superintendent asked the deputy to investigate. 

The superintendent also reviewed video surveillance footage and determined that the inmate was masturbating and the worker watched her for 10 minutes. The video showed the worker looking away when the inmate pulled down her pants and move down the passageway, then looking at the camera and raising his hands in a gesture of frustration. The superintendent determined that the worker should have asked a female correctional officer to relieve him or called the sergeant on duty for help, particularly shouldn’t have been assigned to segregation on his own. 

Three female correctional officers who were on duty in the area at the time – and were shown on the video coming into the segregation area and then leaving - were asked to write occurrence reports about the incident. They all acknowledged that the passage of time and the fact that they didn’t consider the incident worthy of a report made their recollections hazy.  

Occurrence reports 

One of the officers reported that that she heard the worker shout into the hallway that the inmate was “getting naked” and she saw the inmate’s pants were half down. She heard the worker say “push it out” and assumed he was trying to get her to push contraband out of her body. She didn’t offer to relieve the worker and left shortly thereafter. 

A second officer wrote in her report that she thought she heard the worker say something like the inmate should be wearing a skirt and, based on his tone of voice, he was “enjoying himself.” She also left the worker without relieving him. 

A third officer reported that she saw the inmate with her pants down. She asked the worker how long he had been there, and he replied for “a while” and that the inmate had been “grinding the air.” She told the worker that he should have taken steps to be relieved by a female officer and he seemed to be smug about it. She acknowledged that she wasn’t aware that the worker had called into the hallway to let others know what the inmate was doing. 

The worker said that he had been assigned by the sergeant in charge of the shift to constant watch of the female inmate in segregation. He had no training, either at the corrections services college or on the job, about dealing with a female inmate who became naked while under constant watch. 

The inmate in question had refused a body scan and was believed to be carrying contraband, so he understood that he was to watch to ensure her safety and see if she passed any contraband. He didn’t have a radio or keys to the cell, so when she saw the inmate getting naked, he shouted to his co-workers. He agreed that the three female officers came to the area but then left without offering assistance. 

Worker denied misconduct 

The worker claimed that he told the inmate to pull up her pants and denied telling her to “push it out” or remark that she should be wearing a skirt. He also said he stepped back from the cell window and looked away to maintain the inmate’s dignity. 

The superintendent didn’t interview the three female officers about their occurrence reports or ask the worker if he had a radio. 

In late 2021, the ministry discovered that the worker had been erroneously paid his full salary while on medical leave, when he should have been paid 75 per cent under the sick benefits plan. When informed that the overpayment would have to be deducted from his pay, the worker sent an email on Dec. 22 that made unfounded allegations and threatening language towards management. 

The ministry acknowledged the payroll error and the worker apologized for the wording of his email, although he stuck by his position that management had been “caught red-handed” with false accusations against him, calling himself a “whistleblower.” 

The worker went on an extended medical leave in late 2021 due to an operational stress injury, delaying the disciplinary meeting. 

Termination for cause 

A disciplinary meeting was held and the worker’s employment was terminated effective March 31, for the inmate incident and the insubordinate email. The union grieved the termination, arguing there was no cause for discipline in the first incident and termination was excessive for the email. 

The arbitrator found that the ministry had not substantiated its claims that the worker engaged in inappropriate conduct during the April incident. The worker, while assigned to constant watch of a female inmate during his shadowing phase, had no radio or cell keys and both the reports of the other officers and the video indicated that he called out that the inmate was “getting naked,” prompting a response from the other officers. 

The arbitrator also found that the allegations were based largely on occurrence reports drafted two months after the event with hazy recollections and an anonymous letter, rather than direct evidence. The arbitrator determined that the video footage aligned with the worker’s version of events, while the other officers agreed that the incident wasn’t worth reporting at the time. 

Regarding the email to management, the arbitrator found that the worker had used “inappropriate and insubordinate language.” While the employer acknowledged the pay error, the worker’s apology was insufficient, as he maintained the substance of his accusations and deserved some discipline, said the arbitrator. 

The ministry was ordered to reinstate the worker with full compensation, less a three-day suspension for the inappropriate email and any mitigating income. 

See OPSEU and Ontario (Ministry of the Solicitor General) (Semenuk), Re (March 5, 2025), Docket 2022-0590 (ONGSB).