FPSLREB Decisions

Suspension (indefinite period) - Discharge (disciplinary) - Theft of institutional property - Pressure on an inmate - the grievor, a correctional officer (COII), was suspended on September 14, 1999, and discharged on November 16, 1999, for the reasons given by the employer in the letter of discharge, notably, the planned and organized theft of clothing and the repeated exertion of pressure on an inmate - according to the adjudicator, the employer proved the theft of the sweatshirts and the possession of institutional property, but did not prove all of the reasons for the dismissal, the most serious of which, according to the Warden and the investigator's analysis, was the involvement of inmate M and the pressure exerted on him - the adjudicator determined that she must decide whether the theft of institutional property by a peace officer merited a dismissal - she concluded that, in the case at bar, she could not so find because the Warden definitely told her that this fact alone would not necessarily have led to the dismissal of an employee with over twenty years' service - the adjudicator also mentioned another circumstance that mitigated the seriousness of the offence of which the grievor was guilty, namely, the employer's laissez-faire attitude concerning pilfering, evident in relation to the complaints raised by the person in charge of the laundry and the lack of urgency in reacting to inmate M's written statement - the adjudicator concluded that the grievor's grievance with respect to his suspension was dismissed, but that the grievance with respect to his discharge was upheld provided the grievor was reinstated in an AC-II position beginning on March 10, 2002 - the adjudicator ordered the grievor's reinstatement in the Correctional Service, pointing out that the employer could choose to reinstate him in his position at Donnacona or in a position at the same level as the one he held in one of the institutions in the Quebec region where there are AC-II positions - the adjudicator determined that the employer must assume any relocation expenses if it does not reinstate the grievor at Donnacona. Grievance in regard to the suspension for an indefinite period is dismissed. Grievance in regard to the discharge is allowed in part. Case cited : Tipple v. Treasury Board [F.C.A.] 1985 FCJ n°818.