Bell uninstalls technician for language, execution issues

A federal arbitrator has upheld the dismissal of a Bell technician during his probationary period.

Bell Technical Solutions had a collective agreement that allowed it to terminate the employment of probationary employees “for any reason at the sole discretion of the company” as long as it informed the union of the reason.

Ahmad Shaji was hired in March 2017 to be a telecommunications technician. Because of the interaction with customers in homes and businesses, proficiency in English or French was necessary.

English was Shaji’s second language but he spoke it well enough to get the job and to complete classroom training. On May 3, 2017, he began working in the field on his own under supervision by an experienced technician. The operations manager told Shaji that he was to phone him every two hours, but Shaji misunderstood and thought this applied only if he had a problem. As a result, sometimes the operations manager had to call him.

On May 7, a field operations manager told the operations manager that Shaji’s comprehension of English was “not good” and he had to repeat himself when giving instructions. Shaji also incorrectly logged an incomplete job as cancelled by the customer without checking with a manager first, as per policy. The operations manager spoke with Shaji’s two mentors, who both said they found it difficult to communicate with Shaji.

On May 19, the operations manager visited Shaji on an assignment and found he hadn’t used the company’s step-by-step flow chart to install equipment and services. As a result, Shaji missed part of the procedure and made the line he was installing defective. He discovered that Shaji had been using the chart on less than half of his assignments, although technicians were required to use it.

On May 28, Shaji spent five hours at a customer’s house trying to repair a phone line. He called the operations manager and said the customer had called him racial names, so the manager told him to leave. The operations manager was also concerned that Shaji hadn’t called for assistance earlier.

The next morning, when Shaji and other technicians were given their vehicle keys, Shaji complained that he’d only been given half of the keys. The operations manager felt Shaji was being aggressive, so he accompanied him to his vehicle and found the missing half of the keys in the front door lock. Shaji denied that it had been there before, raising concerns about his attitude and failure to take responsibility for it.

The operations manager decided that Shaji’s communication and performance problems made him unfit for employment with Bell. On May 31, Bell terminated Shaji’s employment for “failing to meet the requirements of the job.” The union argued that the primary reason for the termination was Shaji’s lack of English language skills, making it discriminatory. It also argued the union wasn’t properly informed of the reasons for termination.

The arbitrator found that, over time, the operations manager grew frustrated with Shaji’s performance and his lack of comprehension. Evidence indicated that Bell hired many employees who had English as a second language, which indicated “a broad and tolerant attitude towards immigrants.” The issue with Shaji wasn’t his national or ethnic origin, but rather his inability to communicate, the arbitrator said.

The arbitrator also found that Shaji failed to follow procedures, had deficiencies in his work, and showed a poor attitude. Bell reasonably concluded that he wasn’t a good fit, said the arbitrator in finding that Shaji was terminated for operational reasons.

The arbitrator noted that Bell wasn’t obligated to notify Shaji that his employment was in jeopardy as he was already on probation. The company did breach its obligation to provide a reason for termination to the union, but this wasn’t serious enough to invalidate the termination, said the arbitrator.