Train operator fired after running red light – twice

Serious misconduct occured twice in less than 3 years

An arbitrator has upheld the dismissal of a commuter train operator who twice ran a red light while at the controls.

Derek Groulx was a qualified commuter train operator (QCTO) for Bombardier Transportation. In 2008, Bombardier won a contract to provide rail and maintenance services to GO Transit, a government-owned commuter transit service in southern Ontario. The company hired Groulx in February 2008, as he had previously worked for Canadian National Railway (CN), the holders of the GO contract previously.

In May 2009, Groulx was suspended for 60 days for a rule 439 violation, which involved a failure to bring his train to a controlled stop at a red light signal. Groulx had run through the signal because he was focused on contacting the central hub regarding a person who was close to the tracks.

When CN learned of the suspension, it banned Groulx from its property — upon which GO trains operated —which led to Bombardier terminating his employment.

Groulx negotiated a settlement in April 2010 in which he was reinstated without loss of seniority but he was required to re-qualify as a QCTO. He had one other suspension for two days for failing to have a proper job briefing that led to a train delay.

On Nov. 30, 2012, Groulx was operating a GO train heading west out of Union Station in Toronto. The train was under a restricting signal and was moving slowly. Groulx turned his attention away from the track to perform doublechecks and to check his radio. While he was doing this, the train passed a red light signal and ran through a switch not lined up for his train. This led to the train going off course.

A train movement director tried to contact Groulx but was unsuccessful because Groulx was trying to call a foreman for instructions. By that time, signals for another train were showing, but these were dropped as Groulx’s train veered off course. It was also discovered that a running brake test wasn’t performed before the train departed the station.

Groulx acknowledged he had felt fit for duty when he reported for duty earlier in the day, but by the time of his later GO train assignment, he had grown tired and wasn’t rested enough for duty. As this was Groulx’s second rule 439 violation, Bombardier terminated his employment again.

The arbitrator found Groulx’s “error in judgment” wasn’t only serious, but it was his second one in less than two years — and after he had been terminated and then reinstated for the first violation. Though the union cited other cases where a rail employee had not been dismissed for a second such violation, there was a lengthy period of time between the infractions in those circumstances. Because Groulx had two such instances of misconduct in short time, Bombardier had just cause for dismissal. The grievance was dismissed. See Bombardier Transportation and Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, Division 660 (Groulx), Re, 2014 CarswellNat 241 (Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration & Dispute Resolution).

Latest stories