Worker wanted to wear equipment from uniform under previous employer
A worker wasn’t harassed or unjustly fired when he was told repeatedly that he wasn’t following the employer’s uniform rules and then dismissed for it, an Ontario arbitrator has ruled.
The worker was a security guard at an LCBO liquor store, employed with security company Securiguard.
In early 2024, the LCBO transferred its contract to a different company, Garda Canada, to provide security at its stores beginning April 1. Garda offered the worker a security guard position and the worker accepted, continuing in his role at the LCBO store.
Garda had a uniform policy that outlined the uniform and equipment employees were required to wear when performing their duties. All employees were informed of the policy requirements.
Breach of uniform policy
On May 4, a Garda mobile supervisor was at the worker’s store while the worker was on duty. The supervisor told the worker that his uniform didn’t meet the policy requirements, as he was carrying his own handcuffs, a knife, and a utility tool. He was also wearing a baseball cap with a Canadian flag instead of the required cap with “GardaWorld” on it that the company had issued to him. None of these were permitted under Garda’s policy and the supervisor made a note that the worker “had a complete disregard for uniform compliance and the directive of the supervisor.”
Five days later, the same supervisor came to the LCBO store and saw that the worker still wasn’t complying with the uniform policy and was wearing the same prohibited items. The supervisor told the worker to remove them, but the worker refused.
On May 21, the LCBO store manager formally requested that the worker no longer be assigned to the store, citing concerns about his attitude and performance.
Garda management held a meeting with the worker and he admitted to carrying two sets of personal handcuffs, the utility tool, and a personal baseball cap, and the supervisor had spoken to him multiple times about his uniform. He argued that he had worked security at the LCBO for some time and was certified to wear the equipment in question with his previous employer, so he could continue to do so when the contract was taken over by Garda.
Worker alleged harassment
The worker also said he felt harassed because the supervisor only visited to comment on his uniform, but he acknowledged that no discriminatory or derogatory remarks were made.
On May 24, Garda terminated the worker’s employment for “unprofessional conduct and insubordination.” The union filed three grievances alleging unjust site removal, workplace harassment, and unjust discharge.
The arbitrator noted that when a new employer takes over from another and an employee decides to work for the new employer, he becomes subject to the terms and conditions of employment of the new employer. In addition, the new terms and conditions were negotiated between the employer and the union, said the arbitrator.
The arbitrator found that there was no doubt that the worker was aware of Garda’s uniform policy and he wasn’t following it. He had been told multiple times that he was in breach of the policy, but he ignored the warnings and insubordinately refused to follow directions, the arbitrator said.
Termination
The arbitrator also found that there was no evidence of harassment, saying that “an employer asking an employee to follow the expected terms of his employment cannot, in the remotest sense, be viewed as harassment.”
The arbitrator determined that it was the worker’s sole decision to not follow Garda’s legitimate uniform policy, despite repeated requests and warnings from his supervisor. As a result, Garda’s decision to terminate his employment was justified, the arbitrator said in dismissing the grievances.
See Garda Canada Security Corp. and USW, Local 5296, Re (April 4, 2025), M.B. Keller - arbitrator (Ont. Arb).
