Two employees suspended after 'bad blood' led to physical altercation
This instalment of You Make the Call features an employee who was suspended after getting into a fight at work.
Robert Birch worked in the Regina distribution centre of McKesson Canada, a distributor of health care products. He had been employed with McKesson for 27 years when, in early 2009, he began having problems with a co-worker. The two employees had some verbal altercations and Birch brought the situation to his supervisor’s attention, telling the supervisor there was “bad blood brewing.” The supervisor told Birch he had spoken to the co-worker about it.
On Jan. 29, 2009, Birch was moving product on pallets with a hand-operated jack when the co-worker came up behind him, put his finger in Birch’s face and confronted him. Birch told the co-worker to get out of his face and moved his hand towards the co-worker. The co-worker took a swing at Birch’s head, which missed Birch but knocked his hat off.
The co-worker stepped back, but was still close to Birch. Birch reacted by extending his arm towards the co-worker’s shoulder and pushing him away. The co-worker lost his balance and fell into some pallets of product. The co-worker got up, faced Birch and they exchanged words. The co-worker started to move towards Birch but another employee got between them and eventually the co-worker left. For most of the incident, Birch kept operating the pallet jack with one hand.
Birch immediately reported the incident to his supervisor and said the co-worker hit him. The supervisor viewed surveillance video and determined both men had participated equally in the fight. Birch claimed he only acted in self-defence, but the supervisor felt Birch reached out, hit and pushed the co-worker into the pallets while the co-worker was moving away. The supervisor determined Birch had struck in retaliation rather than in self-defence.
McKesson found the two employees had violated its policies on harassment and violence in the workplace, which specified employees who acted contrary to the policies would be “subject to the full range of disciplinary sanctions.” The company felt it had made it clear to both the union and employees that it did not tolerate any violence or horseplay on its premises. Both employees were suspended without pay for two days.
You Make the Call
Was a suspension appropriate for Birch’s involvement in the fight and violation of the company’s policy?
OR
Should Birch have been given a break because he didn’t start the fight?
If you said Birch should not have been suspended, you’re right. After Birch filed a grievance claiming McKesson suspended him without cause, the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board found it was clearly the co-worker who started the altercation and Birch’s actions were consistent with someone acting in self-defence, looking to defuse the situation. After the co-worker made the aggressive move by taking a swing at Birch, Birch did what was necessary to hold him back.
The board also found the supervisor’s belief that Birch aggressively struck the co-worker while the co-worker was moving away wasn’t reasonable. Birch reacted immediately, before he would be able to determine what the co-worker was doing, and while the co-worker was still in close proximity. The co-worker more likely fell because he lost his balance, not because of excessive force.
The board also noted the fact Birch kept working with the pallet jack and didn’t move to further engage the co-worker.
“It is noteworthy that during the entire incident Birch acted in a manner consistent of an employee interested in doing his work rather than engaging in a fight with a co-worker,” said the board. “He only removed his other hand from the pallet jack to distance himself from (the co-worker) and to defend his person.”
