case citation

1. KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY
LABOUR & EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
HRMT 5190 P50
CASE CITATIONS
VENUS SACHDEVA, KHUSHI CHAWLA, ANNA GRIGOREVA

2. Page | 2
Table of Contents
Case 1. ..........................................................................................................................................................3
Decision....................................................................................................................................................3
Similarities...............................................................................................................................................4
Principle...................................................................................................................................................5
Remedy ....................................................................................................................................................5
Case 2. ..........................................................................................................................................................5
Decision....................................................................................................................................................6
Explain the law........................................................................................................................................6
Principle...................................................................................................................................................8
Remedy ....................................................................................................................................................8

3. Page | 3
Case 1.
Western Forest Products Inc. and USW, Local 1-1937 (Bell), Re 2018 CarswellBC 3104, 138 C.L.A.S. 90,
297 L.A.C. (4th) 184 in the matter of an arbitration under the Labour Relations code of B.C Western Forest
Products inc. (the "Employer" or "WFP") and United Steelworkers, Local 1-1937 (the "Union")
Western Forest Products Inc. and USW, Local 1-1937 (Bell), Re
297 L.A.C. (4th) 184.
It is about discipline. In this case, Dean Bell, the griever, worked as a Checker for 30 years at a
mill and had no discipline record. He fell into a physical altercation with Dan Schmidt, the
forklift driver at the mill. The employer has a strict policy stating, “Violent behaviour or threats
of violence of any kind, either direct or implied, are prohibited on Western Forest Products Inc.
property and at Western-sponsored events. An employee who makes threats of violence or
commits a violent act against another employee will be subject to disciplinary action up to and
including termination and possibly reporting of the incident to police...” The griever breached
this policy by physically assaulting Mr. Schmidt because of his poor job performance.
Additionally, he was dishonest and uncooperative during the investigation process. Eventually,
the union admitted on the griever’s behalf that he initiated the altercation and was dishonest
during the investigation but experienced remorse and filed a grievance for him, stating that
dismissal was excessive.
Decision: the arbitrator decided that the termination is not excessive and the grievance is denied
as the employment relationship has been irreparably harmed.
Explain the law: I would like to draw your attention to the following passages in Western Forest
Products Inc.:

4. Page | 4
 On page 24 paragraph #122 the arbitrator stated: “As has been noted in a number of
recent arbitration decisions, there is a growing societal intolerance of workplace violence,
which is also reflected in recent changes to the Workers Compensation Act of B.C.”
 On page 18, paragraph #6 the arbitrator stated: “As has been noted in a number of recent
arbitration decisions, there is a growing societal intolerance of workplace violence, which
is also reflected in recent changes to the Workers Compensation Act of B.C. Physical and
verbally abusive behaviour in the workplace is totally unacceptable. Assaults and threats
are universally regarded as being fundamentally inconsistent with an employer’s
legitimate interest (and obligation) in creating a positive, safe work environment for its
employees: Brown and Beatty at 7:3430.”
 Also on the page 19 paragraph # 8 the arbitrator stated: “It is well established that
honesty is a cornerstone of the employment relationship. Dishonesty strikes at the heart
of that relationship and, in and of itself, can constitute a serious impediment to a
conclusion the relationship can be repaired. Employees who lie to their employers are
generally viewed by arbitrators as having breached a foundation of the employment
relationship: see for example MVT at para 489.”
 On page 21, paragraph #6 the arbitrator mentioned, “A lack of a timely apology or
expression of remorse, coupled with a dishonest explanation maintained over a long
period, constitutes a significant impediment to concluding the employment relationship is
salvageable...”
Similarities: Mr. chair, this case is similar to ours in the following respects:
 Dean Bell, as Mike Novak, had a long length of service with no discipline record;
 workplace altercations are intolerable in the context of Wm. Scott & Co. case;

5. Page | 5
 when employees are dishonest and uncooperative during the investigation process
affect the employment relationship.
Dean and Mike participate in unprovocative violence, and are dishonest when
confronted by the employer;
 after investigation, they admit to their errors but exhibit remorse when it is
discovered that they were dishonest. While remorse might be agreeable, it does not
repair the employment relationship. In both cases, the employer cannot believe that
the employees will stay in their best conduct.
Principle: Mr Chair, Western Forest Products Inc. Case stands for the proposition that where an
employee does not INTEND to commit fraud but is less than cooperative with the employer in
addition to being dishonest, such an employer has base for employee's dismissal.
Remedy: Because of this, Mr. Chair, we submit that you should deny Mike’s grievance and
decide in favour of TransLink.
Case 2.
275 L.A.C. (4th) 1
British Columbia Arbitration
Canadian Forest Products Ltd. and USW, Local 1-424 (Sandhu), Re
2017 CarswellBC 482, [2017] B.C.W.L.D. 1811, [2017] B.C.W.L.D. 1813, [2017] B.C.W.L.D. 1815,
[2017] B.C.W.L.D. 1817, [2017] B.C.C.A.A.A. No. 10, 130 C.L.A.S. 122, 275 L.A.C. (4th) 1
in the matter of: A Union grievance filed on behalf of Jaskaran Sandhu alleging discharge contrary to the
collective agreement
of canadian forest products ltd. (isle pierre division) (employer) and united steelworkers, local 1- 424
(Union)

6. Page | 6
Mr. Chair, the Jaskaran Sandhu Termination Case is about discipline and termination. In that
case, Jaskaran Sandhu was a Cut off saw operator with 22 years of seniority who was terminated
over alcoholism at a safety-sensitive workplace. He also had several disciplinary offences. The
company, union and the griever were engaged in the accommodation process since the griever’s
diagnosis of alcoholism. For five years, the griever was required to phone the monitoring
doctor's office every assigned workday and attend alcohol testing when randomly directed to do
so while also participating in AA meetings. The griever was required to inform the doctor of his
vacation days, but he lied about informing the doctor’s assistant about additional vacation days.
The griever then denied any knowledge about informing the doctor. Jaskaran Sandhu was
terminated for dishonesty leading to a grievance procedure between the union and the employer.
The union claimed that the employer lacked reasons to terminate an employee based on
alcoholism and chose to use minor reasons as the cause for termination.
Decision: the arbitrator decided that "in the face of all the Employer extended to the Griever
over three years by way of accommodation, the Griever’s dishonesty breached the trust inherent
in this employment relationship. There is no basis to reinstate the griever and extend the
accommodation process.”
Explain the law:
I would like to draw your attention to the following passages in Western Forest Products Inc.:
 “On page 58 paragraph #2 the arbitrator stated: Section s. 82(2) of the Labour Relations
Code R.S.B.C. 1996 mentioned that “ An arbitration board, to further the purpose
expressed in subsection (1), must have regard to the real substance of the matters in
dispute and the respective merit of the positions of the parties to it under the terms of the
collective agreement, and must apply principles consistent with the industrial relations

7. Page | 7
policy of this Code, and is not bound by a strict legal interpretation of the issue in
dispute.”
 Also, on page 14 paragraph #8, the arbitrator stated: “If an arbitrator is required to
consider the Employee's termination, he shall only have jurisdiction to decide whether the
Employee has breached any provision of this Agreement and whether any dismissal
under this Agreement is for just and reasonable cause having regard to all terms of this
Agreement.”
 On page 91, paragraph #1, the arbitrator cited another case, Board of School Trustees of
School District No. 23 (Central Okanagan) v. Renaud, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 970: “The search
for accommodation is a multi-party inquiry. Along with the employer and the union,
there is also a duty on the complainant to assist in securing an appropriate
accommodation. The inclusion of the complainant in the search for accommodation was
recognized by this Court in O'Malley. At page 555, McIntyre J. stated: To facilitate the
search for an accommodation, the complainant must do his or her part as well.
Concomitant with a search for reasonable accommodation is a duty to facilitate the search
for such an accommodation. Thus, in determining whether the duty of accommodation
has been fulfilled the complainant’s conduct must be considered.”
The arbitrator explained that in this case, the grievor also refused to continue the treatment,
although it was his duty. He also noted that it is an undue hardship for an employer to continue
accommodating an employee, thereby undermining his chances of recovery.
Similarities: Mr. Chair, this case is similar to ours in the following respects the employee
exhibited dishonesty while undergoing an addiction.

8. Page | 8
The reason why this case is critical is that the employee did not inform the employer beforehand
for them to consider accommodation; Mike informed about his gambling addiction only when
confronted and chose to lie about his altercation and misuse of the benefit of free transit access
for his children’s access which breached the inherent trust of the employment relationship. It
stands for the principle that the employee is justly terminated for his actions. of dishonesty.
Principle: Western Forest Products Inc. case stands for the proposition that where an employee
violated the agreement with the employer, and also tried to hide this deceit, exempts the
employer from the need to continue to accommodate and makes termination NOT excessive
under the circumstances.
Remedy: Mr. Chair, due to the causes above, we submit that you should deny Mike’s grievance
and decide in favour of TransLink.
Driver termination – out of question and confidential
The fact was also dishonesty about the altercation and misquoting him initiating the argument. –
misleading the company. And we expected better from him as a shop steward. The company
promises to create a safe environment, however, Mike chose to inform CMBC only after being
confronted for his wrong actions.

9. Page | 9