Hearsay evidence also argued by union
Four employees of United Airlines in Vancouver were terminated due to unethically benefiting from the company’s fare system.
An Dec. 16, 2010 anonymous email alleged Jennifer Thacker and Tony Scott, were overdoing it with the company’s “waivers and favours rule” whereby an employee can purchase airline tickets for friends and family at a discount.
Senior investigator with corporate security Salvato-Pinto began an investigation into the allegations.The investigation brought to light one ticket purchased Dec. 31, 2008, by Thacker from Vancouver to San Francisco. It was scheduled to depart Jan. 14, 2009, but it was then changed to Jan. 13, which meant the 14-day advance purchase discount was no longer in force. It was also re-routed to Chicago, then to Las Vegas.
The ticket was modified twice in a two-week period, but no fees were charged.
Another flight booked for Scott’s parents included a 20 per cent employee discount. Again, it was modified and no extra fees were charged and the employee discount remained intact.
In all, 63 violations of the rule were discovered by Salvato-Pinto.
In the collective agreement under the heading “rules of conduct for (International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers) IAMAW-represented employees,” it stated violations of certain rules may result in discharge. One of the rules calls for no “inappropriate waiving of a fare rule or restriction.”
In February 2011, the employees were all interviewed about their actions. Seven were interviewed, but three were found to have committed no violations.
Ada Li, another employee, was found to have conducted 31 transactions that waived fees. Scott was questioned about 13 transactions, including one for Thacker. Katerina Sliacky was grilled over 10 transactions.
Finally, Thacker was probed about 29 airline ticket transactions.
One of the reinstated workers, identified only as “M.R.,” said she felt “pressured” by Thacker, Sliacky and Li not to add the differences in fees and service costs on various ticket purchases.
In dismissing the four workers, a June 2011 letter from Vancouver manager Nigel Newsome read, in part, “Tickets were purchased, and then subsequently the flights were changed to different dates, to higher and more expensive booking codes, with no collection of the fare increase due to the company. Further, change fees were waived.”
The four workers filed a “no evidence” motion alleging previous testimony from Salvato-Pinto “amounts to hearsay — double, triple, quadruple hearsay. They were not business records.”
But United countered the “no evidence” motion by saying hearsay was acceptable in arbitration.
Arbitrator Stan Lanyon agreed and he also ruled printouts produced during the investigation were to be considered valid business documents.
“These ticket transactions are records that were written, recorded and stored, contemporaneously with the events they described, and in United’s ordinary course of its business. During the investigation, they were reproduced and printed.”
In the motion, the employees argued United in effect accused them of committing fraud, which is a serious crime and therefore standards of evidence were not sufficient to initiate a termination.
But the employees were fired because of a violation of a rule, not fraud. “The grievors’ terminations were based on the violation of rule two (that) prohibits employees from deviating from the established rules and procedures with respect to providing travel services for themselves, their family and friends, and their co-workers.”
The four ex-employees were advised to return for a future hearing. “The grievors have the ability to re-argue the issues they have raised in their no-evidence motion,” said Lanyon.
Reference: United Airlines and IAMAW, District Lodge 140. Stan Lanyon — arbitrator. Shane Todd, Eric Mennel for the employer. Tania Canniff for the employee. Sept. 12, 2016.
