Apparently suspicious of her supervisor’s motives, a worker in the meat department at a large food retailer filed two grievances alleging harassment, discrimination and bullying.
The worker alleged that a couple of incidents where she had been coached on proper procedures were in fact cases where she had been singled out, harassed and bullied.
B.L. was hired in 1983 to work part-time in the meat department at a large food retailer. Her principal duties were setting up the meat counter and wrapping and code dating the meat.
Beginning in the spring of 2008 a number of incidents occurred where she perceived that she was being criticized. Referring to extensive notes that she kept detailing the incidents, B.L. alleged that one of the assistant managers had belittled her by questioning her competence with respect to handling price changes.
Left work early
A few months later, B.L. reported to work feeling unwell and left early after asking a coworker to tell her supervisor that she had left. Reminded by her supervisor some time later that she needed to speak with a department head under those circumstances, B.L. became very upset and took the reminder as a reprimand and further evidence that her supervisor did not like her.
Some months after that, a minor incident brought to light some of the variables with respect to how to correctly code date meat products depending on whether either fresh or frozen stuffing is added to a fresh product.
The store manager used the incident as an opportunity to go over coding procedures with staff and conducted a brief meeting to that end. However, B.L. was away that day and so was called up to the manager’s office when she returned to be brought up to speed. References to other workplace policies respecting personal telephone calls, notification requirements when leaving the floor were also brought up and noted by the manager on a Discipline Report Form — though the form was modified to indicate that it reflected “counselling.”
While the form had been modified, B.L.’s notes indicated that she was very upset. B.L. took the view that she had been “written up” and she filed a grievance.
The same issues came up for discussion again in the meeting to resolve her grievance. In that meeting, B.L. responded to discussion about the need to follow workplace policies by pointing to lapses by other employees — including excessive cigarette breaks and coffee drinking at workstations.
B.L.’s notes then recorded with dismay that her coworkers began to refer to new rules cracking down on coffee-drinking as her rules.
Accused supervisor
Matters came to a head a number of months later when B.L. accused her supervisor of grinding and repackaging expired meat. The allegations were taken seriously and an investigation was conducted, however no evidence was found to support her charge. When B.L. questioned the results of the investigation, she was shown a piece of meat that she had mis-wrapped. Told that she could be written up for the error, B.L. was instead told that she would not be disciplined and that accidents do happen.
A few hours later, B.L. left work and never went back. She filed a stress claim with the compensation board and a duty of fair representation complaint against her union with the labour board while pursuing her grievances against the employer.
B.L. was not harassed, bullied or discriminated against, the Arbitrator said. “The grievor has continually sought to portray herself as a victim, as cowed by management. Yet, she repeatedly responded aggressively to directions and anything she interpreted as criticism,” the Arbitrator said.
Despite the allegations in her notes, the Arbitrator did not accept the charge that the store manager was sarcastic. “It is the grievor who is rude and insubordinate,” the Arbitrator said.
B.L. was also hostile and rude to her supervisor and sought to implicate him in wrongdoing.
The Arbitrator accepted that B.L. was deeply distraught when she went off work. “Her testimony as to her mental state and treatment since leaving work and the effect on her family was moving. Her situation is truly unfortunate. Nonetheless, it must be stated in no uncertain terms that the employer did not harass, discriminate against, or bully the grievor. Whatever the underlying reasons for her condition, the employer is not at fault.”
The grievances were dismissed.
