Canada Post worker claimed chats with social worker friend were counselling sessions
A British Columbia arbitrator has upheld the firing of a Canada Post worker who misled his employer on anger management counselling he was supposed to take as part of a last-chance agreement.
Steven Barré was an inside worker for Canada Post in Prince Rupert, B.C. On July 27, 2009, Barré damaged a wall in the lunchroom at work in what was described as “intimidating, threatening actions” towards a co-worker. Canada Post planned to dismiss Barré over the misconduct, but an agreement was reached between Canada Post, the union and Barré that would allow him to keep his job.
Under the agreement, Barré reimbursed Canada Post for repairs to the wall. He also was required to provide a written apology to the co-worker he threatened. In addition, the biggest stipulation was that Barré had to enroll in an anger management course within 30 days of signing the agreement and provide written confirmation of completion of the course to his manager. Barré also had to keep his employer informed of the identity of the course provider, the number of sessions and his attendance. If such a course wasn’t available in Prince Rupert, the union was to inform Canada Post and they would discuss options.
Barré signed the agreement with the understanding that this was his last chance to remain employed with Canada Post. It was to be in effect for 18 months and it was made clear that if he breached the terms of the agreement in that time, he would be fired immediately.
In August 2009, Barré informed Canada Post in writing that he had booked an eight-week anger management program with Steve Crump, a social worker at a mental health and addictions clinic in Prince Rupert. The program started the week of Aug. 23 and would be once a week.
On Nov. 25, Barré followed up by providing written confirmation that he had “successfully completed the program” in October. Canada Post requested further confirmation from Crump, who supplied a letter certifying he had completed the anger management counselling outlined in Barré’s last-chance agreement.
Employee’s subterfuge revealed
About one year later, another employee contacted Crump regarding anger management counselling but Crump said that no such program was available in Prince Rupert, while questioning whether Canada Post was qualified to diagnose anger management issues. Upon hearing this, Canada Post checked with the clinic, which confirmed the absence of anger management counselling and conducted its own investigation of its employee, Crump.
On Jan. 17, 2010, the clinic informed Canada Post that Barré did not complete any program or treatment and his presence at the clinic amounted to several discussions with Crump before Crump gave him a letter confirming treatment. It turned out Barré and Crump knew each other previously and Barré convinced Crump to help him with his anger issues. Crump confirmed that both men knew it wasn’t official treatment but went through with the discussions to give the appearance of it. Crump had also avoided entering Barré in the clinic’s electronic charting system because he didn’t want any records of Barré attending at the clinic.
On Jan. 19, Canada Post gave Barré a 24-hour notice of interview for the next day, indicating they would be discussing his anger management program and last-chance agreement. At the interview, the union felt the notice was too vague and, after discussion with his representatives, Barré left the interview before it was finished. He was advised the corporation would proceed without him.
Canada Post decided Barré’s dishonesty about receiving anger management counselling violated its trust and he also failed to live up to his last-chance agreement. It decided to terminate his employment for “deliberate deception regarding the (agreement) and breach of trust and breach of the (agreement) ,” effective Jan. 21, 2010.
The arbitrator noted that when the clinic investigated, Crump acknowledged that he didn’t provide actual anger management counselling to Barré and had a conflict of interest that should have caused him to remove himself from any professional dealings with Barré.
The arbitrator found that Canada Post’s decision to continue with the dismissal after Barré left the interview was risky as it didn’t give him a chance to respond. However, the evidence it had from its investigation and the report from the clinic was sufficient to provide the reasons for dismissal outlined in the termination letter. Barré knew he was required to notify his manager of any changes to his counselling, and Canada Post had been informed by the clinic and Crump of the nature of his treatment.
Employee knew his obligations
The arbitrator also found Barré was given enough notice for the reason for the interview and a chance to fully participate. He was also aware of what was expected of him according to the requirements in the last-chance agreement and it was his “one last chance” to stay on with Canada Post, said the arbitrator.
“(Barré) was fully aware of his commitments, as reinforced in his letters to the corporation wherein he purported to confirm his enrolment in, and completion of, the ‘program’ he was obliged to take under the (agreement),” said the arbitrator.
The arbitrator found that both Barré and Crump didn’t believe Barré really needed anger management counselling and therefore looked for a way to get around that requirement of Barré’s last-chance agreement. The meetings they had were not intended to help Barré meet the goal outlined in the agreement and Barré understood the letters he gave to Canada Post left a false impression. He showed no remorse for his subterfuge or the original incident that gave rise to the last-chance agreement. He also had several months to find another program but did not, said the arbitrator.
