Worker ate pizza destined for garbage bin at the end of the day
A grocery store’s firing of a teenaged employee for eating extra pizza at the end of her shift was too harsh, an arbitrator has ruled.
A 16-year-old girl working for a Dominion grocery store in Toronto was fired on Jan. 26, 2006, for violating company policies. The policies were the store’s employee purchase policy, which stated all employees must purchase products at regular prices, and the theft policy, which stipulated any employee who takes any product without payment is subject to discipline up to and including dismissal. This included any perishable food which would be thrown out at the end of the day.
The store learned the employee, along with several others, had taken and eaten slices of pizza headed for the garbage when the store closed. When confronted, all the employees admitted they had eaten pizza without paying for it. All were suspended and ultimately fired.
The employee grieved her termination, claiming she only ate a few bites as she was carrying the pizza in a clean bag to the garbage. She said if she’d known how serious the store considered the transgression, she wouldn’t have done it. The store argued company policy allowed no exceptions because of its vulnerability to theft. The policy was made very clear to all employees, she was aware of it and admitted she knew her conduct violated the policy.
The arbitrator agreed the employee had violated the policy and was aware of it, but said she didn’t realize the seriousness of her actions.
The arbitrator also felt the transgression was not significant enough to warrant dismissal. Although the policy was clear, the employee eating a few bites on the way to the garbage was a relatively minor breach that deserved lesser discipline.
“I am satisfied that the (employee) truly did not grasp the impropriety of her actions at the relevant time,” the arbitrator said.
The arbitrator ordered the employee to be reinstated with a one-day suspension substituted as discipline and given compensation for any loss of earnings or benefits from the dismissal beyond the suspension. See New Dominion Stores v. CAW-Canada, Local 414, 2006 CarswellOnt 8757 (Ont. Arb. Bd.).
A 16-year-old girl working for a Dominion grocery store in Toronto was fired on Jan. 26, 2006, for violating company policies. The policies were the store’s employee purchase policy, which stated all employees must purchase products at regular prices, and the theft policy, which stipulated any employee who takes any product without payment is subject to discipline up to and including dismissal. This included any perishable food which would be thrown out at the end of the day.
The store learned the employee, along with several others, had taken and eaten slices of pizza headed for the garbage when the store closed. When confronted, all the employees admitted they had eaten pizza without paying for it. All were suspended and ultimately fired.
The employee grieved her termination, claiming she only ate a few bites as she was carrying the pizza in a clean bag to the garbage. She said if she’d known how serious the store considered the transgression, she wouldn’t have done it. The store argued company policy allowed no exceptions because of its vulnerability to theft. The policy was made very clear to all employees, she was aware of it and admitted she knew her conduct violated the policy.
The arbitrator agreed the employee had violated the policy and was aware of it, but said she didn’t realize the seriousness of her actions.
The arbitrator also felt the transgression was not significant enough to warrant dismissal. Although the policy was clear, the employee eating a few bites on the way to the garbage was a relatively minor breach that deserved lesser discipline.
“I am satisfied that the (employee) truly did not grasp the impropriety of her actions at the relevant time,” the arbitrator said.
The arbitrator ordered the employee to be reinstated with a one-day suspension substituted as discipline and given compensation for any loss of earnings or benefits from the dismissal beyond the suspension. See New Dominion Stores v. CAW-Canada, Local 414, 2006 CarswellOnt 8757 (Ont. Arb. Bd.).
