Coquitlam, B.C. worker unjustly dismissed despite catalogue of coworker complaints

A British Columbia worker’s firing for poor work performance was excessive and more deserving of a suspension, an arbitrator has ruled.

Lisa Levesque worked at the Coquitlam Public Library in Coquitlam, B.C. and was originally hired in 1995.

As a customer service lead, Levesque was responsible for overseeing operations when managers were absent, organizing employee schedules and providing assistance to junior employees and the public.

The library had no issues with Levesque’s performance until 2017, when it conducted four coaching discussions with her regarding concerns that she sometimes didn’t perform any work while other staff were busy. In November, the library issued a letter of expectation related to complaints about her taking extended breaks and not supporting coworkers.

On April 23, 2019, a junior employee told Levesque that a customer was asleep but couldn’t be woken up. Levesque unsuccessfully tried to wake up the customer and the junior employee asked her to call emergency services. Levesque refused, saying she had already dealt with the police that evening and she didn’t want to stay after hours. The junior employee called 911 and when the dispatcher instructed them to check if the customer was breathing, Levesque became upset and returned to counting cash after checking.

The library issued Levesque a written warning for failing to undertake the duties of a customer service lead or ensuring the safety of the library and its occupants, and for leaving a junior employee “leaderless.”

On Oct. 1, the library suspended Levesque for one day after she failed to investigate and report that the public computer system was compromised shortly before closing. She didn’t show any concern for the seriousness of the situation at a meeting, and she was warned that “further infractions of this nature will result in discipline, up to and including termination.”

In November, multiple employees complained about Levesque failing to help out, not answering the phone, and acting rude. Management scheduled a meeting to discuss the complaints and advised her of the importance of honesty. However, Levesque was caught off-guard and denied any problems with her work performance — although she eventually acknowledged that she sometimes refused to assist coworkers.

Management felt that Levesque deserved a suspension or demotion, but after she was dishonest in the interview, they terminated her employment. Levesque later said she felt “shocked, overwhelmed, and in a state of disbelief.”

The union filed a grievance for unjust discharge.

The arbitrator found that the evidence indicated that Levesque was culpable for poor work performance as described by the complaints and she was “a very poor supervisor who did little work, avoided tasks she did not like, was not helpful or approachable, and manipulated her position of authority for her own purposes.” The coaching letter, letter of expectation, and suspension she had received previously showed that the library had warned her about such misconduct.

However, the library indicated that Levesque’s work performance wasn’t the reason for termination, but rather it was her dishonesty at the meeting. Although Levesque denied the allegations, she wasn’t told about the complaints beforehand and didn’t have an opportunity to address them. She was taken by surprise at the meeting and it would be reasonable to assume she didn’t realize her job was in jeopardy — which was not an excuse for her false denial but it provided some context for her reaction as she was “probably not doing much more than she had done for some time,” said the arbitrator.

The arbitrator considered Levesque’s lengthy service with only a letter of reprimand and a one-day suspension on her record and determined that termination was excessive. The library was ordered to reinstate Levesque with a two-week suspension in place of the discharge, along with a disciplinary demotion from the customer lead position.