Arbitration panel not unanimous on Epcor employee’s firing over jail time

With one dissenter, a three-person arbitration board has upheld the firing of a longtime Epcor employee who was let go after she was convicted of stealing more than $200,000 from her elderly mother and sentenced to jail time.

The employee, identified in the ruling only by her initials, was fired in June of 2019 after pleading guilty to theft over $5,000 and being sentenced to two years in jail followed by two years of probation. The ruling can be found on the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) site.

“I conclude that the Employer’s decision that there was just cause to terminate the Grievor’s employment,” reads the March 30 ruling of arbitrator David Tettensor. “It was intentional conduct repeated over a significant period of time.”

“It is hard to imagine that the Griever would have passed security screening.”

Chris Lane, the second member of the arbitration board, concurred with Tettensor’s ruling that the company was justified in firing her.

Through her union, the employee argued that a leave of absence was a more appropriate measure given her specialized role at Epcor, that the crime was not work-related and her 29 years of service to the company, and its predecessor, Edmonton Power.

The third member of the arbitration board, David Williams, agreed with that line of reasoning in his dissenting opinion, saying the termination was “without sufficient cause in the circumstances.”

“The Grievor has a significant investment of service that is worthy of protection including the contractual right to not to face termination without just cause,” he wrote.

“The Employer should have placed the Grievor on a leave of absence of eight months.”

GAMBLING ISSUES

The ruling outlines how the employee had been her mother’s sole caregiver for five years at the time she was charged.

She testified she had been dealing with a gambling issue for 30 years, sought treatment but relapsed in 2014 after a death in the family.

She began taking money from her 80-year-old mother in 2017 via e-transfers, and stole over $220,000 before her brother found out and called police, according to the ruling.

She testified she intended to repay the money, but hadn’t.

Additional charges of fraud and forgery were dropped. The ruling states she is also required to pay “significant” financial restitution.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE REJECTED

Since 2000, the woman had worked without issue as a public service representative (PSR) where she answered calls and provided direction to customers and crews with electricity outages.

At the time of her firing, she was 11 months from being able to retire with a full pension.

Her manager testified that staffing was a constant challenge and it took months of training and shadowing to replace a PSR.

Those demands led the company to reject the idea of a leave of absence, over the union’s objections.

“Time, money and resources would be required and then they would have to retrain the returning employee,” her manager testified.

The employee was released from jail in early February of 2020 and was on parole until July 2021.

She remains on probation until July 2023, is now working part-time and testified she has not gambled since her release.

mblack@postmedia.com

@ByMatthewBlack