Union sought compensation for ‘aggressive bully’ fired by city
The union for a former city employee, who allegedly cursed out and assaulted his supervisor, wanted the city to cough up money to compensate for his firing, according to evidence heard in an arbitration hearing where the city’s auditor general gave emotional testimony about this “aggressive bully.”
The arbitrator’s decision this month lays out the city’s case for turfing the employee for a pattern of disturbing behaviour while working for the City of Ottawa. The employee’s name isn’t revealed in the decision.
Instead of the employee’s reinstatement, CUPE Local 503 wanted the arbitration panel to award a sum of money from the city.
The breaking point for the city was a confrontation on Jan. 8, 2010, between the employee, a 52-yearold water-meter reader with 22 years’ experience with the city, and his supervisor. The employee apparently skipped 100 reads on his route on back-to-back days and snapped at his boss when confronted about it.
The termination letter, which is included in the arbitration decision, says the employee delivered a “torrent of verbal abuse” toward the supervisor before “driving” his elbow into the supervisor’s sternum.
At one point, the employee allegedly launched a profanitylaced barrage against his boss.
The city was so concerned about the employee’s behaviour, it asked him to be subjected to a psychological assessment, especially since there were already blemishes on his employment record.
It started in 2008 with a letter of reprimand for failure to perform duties, excess mileage claims, unauthorized leave and “inappropriate confrontational behaviour.”
In 2009 he was suspended for five days for a variety of reasons, including time theft, breach of trust and “continued insubordination” that included derogatory behaviour.
After that, there was a threeday suspension for aggressive and intimidating behaviour and failing to perform duties.
The employee was placed in the water-meter-reading job because he couldn’t work well with others in a previous position.
The January 2010 incident showed “a very serious escalation of inappropriate behaviour and displays of anger in the workplace,” the termination letter said. It was signed by Ken Hughes, who is currently the auditor general, but at the time was deputy treasurer in charge of revenue, which included the water meter work.
The arbitration decision says Hughes gave “emotional testimony” about the employee’s behaviour and it quoted Hughes, who testified, “I worked very hard to build a respectful workplace” and said he felt he had failed his staff, particularly the supervisors who had to deal with the difficult employee.
According to the arbitration decision, Hughes called the employee “an aggressive bully” during his testimony.
The decision says the employee saw a psychologist in February 2010. The city wanted to know if the employee, who was just a few years away from retirement, had a condition that required special accommodation at work.
The psychologist found that the employee didn’t have a condition, but rather some “personality traits” that made him compulsive, paranoid and narcissistic.
The arbitration panel chair wrote that the employee has shown no remorse.
“To the contrary, well after the events in question (the employee) was still declaring that his supervisor ‘got what he deserved,’ ” the arbitrator wrote.
The arbitration panel concluded the firing was justified and there shouldn’t be compensation.
However, the panel ordered that the employee be compensated for a 9.5-week period in which he was placed on unpaid leave.