Bullying crossed line beyond labour relations

B.C. union executive suspended for treatment of HR advisor

Bullying crossed line beyond labour relations

A British Columbia arbitrator has upheld the suspension of a union executive for a tirade and angry emails directed at an HR advisor.

The executive was a municipal employee for the District of Squamish, B.C. The district has a respectful workplace policy (RWP) that defined bullying and harassment as including “any inappropriate conduct or comment by a person towards an employee that the person knew or reasonably ought to have known would cause that employee to be humiliated or intimidated.”

On July 31, 2017, the worker came to the human resources office upset, saying in a raised voice that the HR advisor had disrespected her. The worker — who was on the union executive — said angrily that the HR advisor wasn’t giving her enough time to represent her union members at meetings and was tarnishing her reputation.

The office door was open, and the worker’s raised voice drew another employee over who didn’t feel comfortable hearing the conversation. The worker responded by walking away and stating loudly that there would be “many more grievances,” which was overheard by others.

The advisor filed a complaint under the RWP, saying it was “a direct attack on my personal integrity and character.” She added that the worker had made other accusations — including in multiple emails — outside the proper grievance channels, which made her feel bullied.

An independent investigator reviewed the complaint and suggested she broaden the investigation to include the overall relationship between the worker and the HR advisor, but the district and the union both rejected the idea.

The union later claimed the RWP didn’t apply to the worker because she was a member of the union executive and the worker would only participate in the investigation if a copy of the complaint with details was provided in advance of any investigation meeting.

Two weeks later, the union filed a grievance alleging that the district had failed to conduct a “timely investigation” or provide the worker with details on the complaint. It also claimed the worker was exempt from the RWP since the confrontation was related to labour relations.

On Oct. 30, the district asked the worker to meet with the investigator, but the worker said she wouldn’t do so until she had received the particulars of the complaint. The district complied a few days later, but the worker went on medical leave and declined to participate until she was medically cleared.

The worker began a gradual return to work in late December, returning full-time in early January 2018. The investigator interviewed her on Jan. 26, when she expressed regret about the accusations she had made. She acknowledged that asking the advisor to personally apologize in relation to grievances both in person and by email was inappropriate.

The investigator determined that the worker had engaged in “a clear pattern of abuse” that violated the RWP. The district offered to provide the report to the worker and the union for comments before it took any action, but the union refused, arguing that the worker had already spoken to the investigator.

On March 12, the district suspended the worker for three days. The union filed a second grievance over the suspension.

The arbitrator first found no unreasonable delay of the investigation. There was discussion of a broader investigation and the worker was absent from work for a month, so the delay wasn’t solely the district’s fault and there was no evidence it caused prejudice against the worker, said the arbitrator.

The arbitrator also found there was no reason to go beyond the findings of the investigator, who determined the worker’s actions violated the RWP. Though the union argued the worker was acting as a union executive, the arbitrator found her comments “were not limited to heated debate over the merits of a workplace issue” and crossed the line into personal attacks.

The arbitrator determined that the three-day suspension was appropriate, particularly since it was “a relatively short suspension.”

Reference: Squamish (District) and CUPE, Local 2269. Mark Brown — arbitrator. Nazeer Mitha for employer. Rodger Oakley for employee. March 4, 2020. 2020 CarswellBC 1166

Latest stories