FPSLREB Decisions

The grievor, a correctional officer, grieved three disciplinary actions that the respondent took against him. In the first, it imposed a financial penalty equivalent to three days’ pay after he made threatening and offensive remarks in a phone call. In the second, it suspended him without pay for 25 days for sexually harassing multiple female colleagues, including inappropriate touching and remarks. In the third, it suspended him without pay and then terminated him for engaging in similar acts of sexual harassment within weeks of returning from the previous suspension and for making light of that suspension. The grievor admitted that the phone call took place but flatly denied engaging in harassment of any kind. The Board denied the first grievance, finding that the grievor’s remarks were so offensive that they warranted discipline and that the penalty was not excessive. For the second and third grievances, the outcome came down to witness credibility and reliability, given that the grievor completely denied wrongdoing. The Board found that the testimonies of the employer’s 13 witnesses were believable but that the grievor’s bald denial of all the actions that he was accused of was not. Both actions warranted discipline, and, applying the seven factors set out in Naqvi, the discipline imposed was appropriate. The extreme nature of the harassment, the grievor’s complete lack of regret, the nature of his position as a manager and correctional officer, the power imbalance between him and his victims, and the impact on the complainants were all aggravating factors. They well outweighed the lone mitigating factor, which was limited to the grievor’s 14 years of service. While the length of the investigation into the first sexual harassment allegations would ordinarily be a consideration, the respondent had already applied that factor when it decided to impose a 25-day suspension instead of terminating him, as it had initially planned.

Grievances denied.