Company accused employee of fraud, time theft
A Saputo dairy worker in Abbotsford, B.C., asked for time off to attend his daughter’s birthday dinner — but his request was denied.
Roger Little had been working since 2010 as an electrician. On May 2, 2014, he asked Dave Sander, plant manager, for time off May 24, so he could attend his daughter’s birthday dinner.
On May 9, Sander denied the request because dairy production operated on a strict schedule, with limited downtime. Sander testified that Little asked if he could invoke a family responsibility day.
But Sander said B.C. family responsibility day legislation did not apply in this case.
On May 23, Little said a 2011 shoulder injury flared up after he carried a piece of equipment while on duty. He finished the shift and went home, but did not notify anyone about the injury.
On May 24, he said the soreness was worse and he called in sick.
When Sander learned on May 26 of the absence, he set up an investigative meeting and on June 4, Saputo issued him a one-day suspension.
On June 17, Little requested four hours’ standby time and four hours’ call-back time at double time for a shift, but the time sheet was challenged by Sander. He testified that the work should have been completed within two hours and he didn't authorize standby pay, which was so rare that Sander said he never heard about it happening in his 10 years at the plant.
Little was told to modify the timesheet, but he completed a new one with no changes.
After an investigation, the company decided to terminate his employment on June 27, citing past discipline (including vandalism of a company poster in 2011) and the sick leave incident from May.
In arguing that the termination should stand, the company said it found 50 instances of inconsistent statements and Little’s “evidence is contrary to common sense, is self-serving, reflects a highly selective memory, and there are a number of embellishments or statements that are unbelievable.”
Saputo said the sick leave incident could be considered fraud and the standby pay request could be construed as time theft.
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, lodge 1857, argued a grievance was filed for the sick leave case but was not yet heard before the June termination. It said Little believed he was entitled to standby pay under the collective agreement and this showed he was not attempting time theft.
The union said the company has a process whereby time sheets were reviewed and if a claim for overtime or standby pay was not allowed, it wasn’t paid out.
Arbitrator Michael Fleming found Little’s May 24 behaviour troubling. “(He) should have been keen to speak to Sander given the striking coincidence of his injury on the day he had been actively, but unsuccessfully, attempting to find a way of taking off.”
The absence was not “due to a legitimate need for sick leave, but rather was a decision to take the day off notwithstanding that his request had been denied earlier, claiming a re-injury to his shoulder as the cause,” said Fleming. “I find this constituted an abuse of sick leave which under this agreement constitutes misconduct.”
The June 17 incident was more clear-cut, said Fleming. “(Little)’s conduct reflects a falsifying of time records and is captured by the concept of time-theft.” And combined with the sick leave issue, it was a culminating incident.
“It is difficult to conclude that, under all the circumstances, he could return to the plant and for the employer to have any confidence that he could be a trustworthy employee,” said Fleming.
The grievance was dismissed.
Reference: Saputo Foods and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Lodge 1857. Michael Fleming — arbitrator. Peter Csiszar for the employer. Paul Pelletreau for the employee. Aug. 19, 2016.
