Worker felt testing the food helped customers and the company, but company viewed it as theft of product
This edition of You Make the Call features a grocery store deli employee who was caught eating some extra food.
Phalla Chemm started working in a Metro grocery store in Ottawa in 2000, initially as a part-time deli clerk. Her job entailed preparing ready-made salads and sandwiches in the store’s deli department. When Metro launched its “Fresh to Go” line of products, she worked a lot of overtime, sometimes totalling up to 12 hours a day. She was considered a good worker and management was happy with her performance.
Chemm worked the night shift for her first six years in the deli department — the store was open 24 hours a day, seven days a week — and sometimes she ran out of black forest ham, which was required for a certain type of sandwich. When that happened, she sampled another type of meat and substituted it in the sandwich.
Chemm later moved to a full-time day shift in the deli department. On Nov. 8, 2015, she returned from a vacation and was scheduled to work from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. However, her manager told her the sandwich girl had been fired and asked her if she could work the 11:30 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. shift as well. She also learned that other employees had been suspended for eating product.
Ten minutes into her day shift, the store manager called Chemm into his office with Metro’s loss prevention officer and a union representative. She was asked if she knew what “grazing” was, and Chemm replied that she did — it referred to employees eating store product while working without paying for it. Chemm acknowledged that she was aware of Metro’s employee purchase policy, but admitted that she would occasionally eat a French fry that was being thrown out or grapes, meatballs and deli slices when preparing a tray. She said she didn’t think it was wrong, as trying out the product ensured it was appropriate to be served to customers and therefore helped the company. She also said she didn’t take breaks, so eating a grape from a tray gave her energy to keep working — a single item off a tray “wasn’t so wrong,” she said.
The next week, on Nov. 16, Metro terminated Chemm’s employment for breach of trust and company policies and procedures. The union grieved her termination, arguing that Chemm was a long-term employee and she didn’t have wrongful intent when she breached store policy — she claimd she only understood the consequences after returning from her vacation and seeing that people were being suspended.
You Make the Call
Did Metro have just cause for dismissal?
OR
Was the dismissal unfair?
If you said Metro had just cause for dismissal, you’re right. The arbitrator commented that generally, “theft is sufficient to uphold the penalty of discharge because internal theft is difficult to detect.” In addition, trust was fundamental for the employment relationship. When Chemm was confronted with the allegations, she admitted to the theft of store product — grapes, meatballs, deli slices, and French fries — but didn’t apologize for her behaviour, even though she knew it was a breach of company policy. In addition, she went further, trying to justify and downplay her actions, saying she ate food destined to be thrown out or she was helping the store by testing the quality of product before it was sold to customers. The arbitrator particularly questioned the garbage excuse, as there was no reason extra food such as grapes couldn’t be used in another platter instead of being thrown in the garbage.
The arbitrator found that with 15 years of seniority, Chemm should have known better than to “graze” while working, and she “simply does not comprehend that with her consumption of the employer’s product that she in fact was stealing from her employer.” Though Chemm said in the hearing that now that she knew about the consequences of the rules and wouldn’t continue eating food in the store if reinstated, the arbitrator found this to be “a far cry from the apology (she) needed to provide to the employer.”
The arbitrator determined that Chemm’s actions broke the bond of trust with Metro beyond repair by stealing food while working and failing to acknowledge or apologize for her misconduct. Chemm’s dismissal was upheld.
For more information see:
•Metro Ontario Inc. and Unifor, Local 414 (Chemin), Re, 2016 CarswellOnt 14352 (Ont. Arb.).
