City of Toronto staffer fired after confrontation

A heated conversation was more than enough to warrant the termination of a City of Toronto probationary seasonal staffer, an arbitrator has decided.

Andrew Parris, a seasonal probationary staffer working in the city’s solid waste management department, had returned to work following an injury, with some medical restrictions. Parris opted for a light equipment operator position during the work selection rounds. He passed the physical test and believed he could fulfill the position’s duties and responsibilities.

However, on the second day Parris was assigned to work, he called in sick, saying his right knee had swollen to the point where his leg brace would no longer fit. This was not the last time Parris would refuse work citing medical reasons, but he provided no proof from a doctor. Thus he was informed that, should he refuse to work again in the future, he would be subject to disciplinary action up to and including discharge.

The issue came to a head in May 2013 when the city’s managers decided to assign light equipment operators to poster removal duty as it had rained heavily the night before (it is common practice to reassign such staffers to poster removal after a rainfall as it makes the task easier).

Parris informed his supervisor he could not perform the work, and immediately went to his union steward, under the Toronto Civic Employees Union, otherwise known as the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Local 416.

Parris said he did not understand why the city could not accommodate him but the employer determined he was refusing work. He was then suspended.

The situation escalated quickly, and was caught on tape. In video evidence, Parris was seen, visibly upset, swearing at his superiors and allegedly saying he would be back to shoot his direct manager.

Parris said he said "show you" as opposed to "shoot you" but the arbitrator disagreed.

As the employer saw it, there was no other option than to terminate the employee, as it had already issued a one-day suspension in May for the earlier insubordination and work refusal.

"That had been followed by Parris’ aggressive and defiant behaviour in the workplace in using abusive language and gestures to supervisors, and with the threats of violence that had been made to management," the city argued. Further, he was a probationary employee, and the employer had the exclusive right to discharge him.

The union, on the flip side, grieved the initial suspension pending investigation. According to CUPE 416, the grievor was simply engaged in "shop talk" and that he was just "blowing off steam."

However, in her decision, arbitrator Gail Misra sided with the employer and said it is not acceptable to express one’s frustration at work by being abusive and threatening.

At the crux of this case is that the employee did not take responsibility or apologize for his actions, she explained.

"This is a case in which the grievor behaved in an unacceptable and threatening manner, and that was the reason for which his employment was terminated.

"Since the grievor was well aware that he was still a probationary employee, he ought to have known that being abusive and threatening to management would not be conducive to continuing employment with the city," Misra said, adding that Parris’s discipline had nothing to do with his disability.