Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of discharge arbitrations in British Columbia : 1974-1977 Eeckhout, Tomi Richard 1981

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A4_6 E43.pdf [ 5.17MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095137.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095137-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095137-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095137-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095137-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095137-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095137-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095137-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095137.ris

Full Text

AN ANALYSIS OF DISCHARGE ARBITRATIONS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 1974  - 1977 by  TOMI RICHARD EECKHOUT B.Sc,  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1974  A THESIS SUBMITTED TN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in  THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Business  We accept  this  Administration)  t h e s i s as conforming  to the r e q u i r e d standard  THE  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA March 1981  cjTomi  Richard Eeckhout, 1981  In p r e s e n t i n g  this thesis in p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t of  requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the  the  University  o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make it  f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference  and  study.  I  further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may  be  department o r by h i s o r her  granted by  the head o f  representatives.  my  It i s  understood t h a t c o p y i n g or p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  s h a l l not  be  allowed without my  permission.  Department o f  Industrial  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  D  a  t  e  M a r c h 16,  1981  Relations Columbia  written  ABSTRACT The  safe and  efficient  operation  of any  enterprise  i s to a  c e r t a i n extent dependent upon a d i s c i p l i n e d labour f o r c e . a c t i o n or t h r e a t  of d i s m i s s i n g  powerful t o o l s employers can goal.  However, i t can  arbitrary application  an employee i s one  use  The  of the most  in attempting to achieve  be abused and  protection  i s perhaps one  of the most  against  that  its  important  b e n e f i t s a worker secures from membership in a union.  Union  members d i s m i s s e d for reasons c o n s i d e r e d to be unjust  may  appeal  to a board of a r b i t r a t i o n to o v e r t u r n management's d i s c i p l i n a r y action.  Those employees who  comparison, l i t t l e This  do not  recourse a g a i n s t  the years 1974-1977.  parts.  arbitrary dismissal.  t h e s i s attempts to provide a comprehensive a n a l y s i s  d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n awards f i l e d  studied.•  belong to a union have, by  The  i n B r i t i s h Columbia  A sample of 216  F i r s t , a d e s c r i p t i v e a n a l y s i s of the p a r t i e s  grievors,  the  employers, and  awards i s presented.  d i s p o s i t i o n of the d i s c h a r g e cases s t u d i e d  The  two  (the  the  the  arbitral  i s undertaken.  That  o v e r a l l s t a t i s t i c a l outcome of  the awards i n r e l a t i o n to the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the c o n t a i n e d i n the  was  the a r b i t r a t o r s ) appearing in  Secondly, an a n a l y s i s of the  a n a l y s i s attempts to e x p l a i n  during  a r b i t r a t i o n awards  r e s u l t s of that a n a l y s i s are presented i n  of  parties  awards.  t h e s i s produced r e s u l t s which are b e l i e v e d  to have some  important  practical  implications.  I t was r e v e a l e d that d u r i n g  the p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s employers i n B r i t i s h Columbia were successful arbitrators  i n having  t h e i r d i s c h a r g e a c t i o n s upheld by  i n only one of three cases.  a c c o r d i n g to the labour  This figure varied  f o r c e s i z e of the d i s m i s s i n g f i r m .  Employers of more than 5000 employees were about 50 percent more s u c c e s s f u l than employers of l e s s than  500 employees i n  c o n v i n c i n g a r b i t r a t o r s of the need to d i s m i s s employees. f a i l u r e to administer d i s c i p l i n e  A  i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t with the  theory of c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e appeared to be the major d o w n f a l l of employers of r e l a t i v e l y  few employees.  It i s  proposed, t h e r e f o r e , that i f f e a s i b l e an e d u c a t i o n a l program designed  to the b e n e f i t of employers, unions, and the  a r b i t r a t i o n process  itself  be introduced to employers to i n s u r e  that d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n i s more p r o p e r l y a d m i n i s t e r e d .  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. 11.  III.  INTRODUCTION  1  RESEARCH METHODOLOGY  7  The Sample Data C o l l e c t i o n THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND LEGISLATIVE APPROACHES TO INDUSTRIAL DISCIPLINE  7 9  The Concept of C o r r e c t i v e D i s c i p l i n e The L e g i s l a t i v e Framework Summary IV.  14 ••  AN ANALYSIS OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE DISCHARGE ARBITRATION PROCESS The G r i e v o r s The Empl oye r s The A r b i t r a t o r s Summary  V.  VI.  23 24 36 47 50  AN ANALYSIS OF THE ARBITRAL DISPOSITION OF DISCHARGE ARBITRATIONS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Comparative A n a l y s i s An A n a l y s i s of the Outcomes of Discharge in B r i t i s h Columbia Summary  14 17 . 22  52  52 Arbitrations 59 77  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  80  SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY  86  APPENDICES 1. Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 2. Industrial Classification ' 3. Chairmen of A r b i t r a t i o n Boards Appearing in the Sample Studied  89 91 93  V  LIST OF TABLES Table 1.  Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  by Year  23  2.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Sex  3.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Occupation  4.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by S e n i o r i t y  28  5.  D i s c i p l i n a r y Record of the G r i e v o r s  30  6.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Union A f f i l i a t i o n  31  7.  Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l  34  8.  Occupation by Cause for D i s m i s s a l  9.  I n d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the G r i e v o r s and  25 ...26  ..35 the  Employers  38  10.  Discharge  11.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the Employers and the G r i e v o r s by T o t a l O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment Elapsed Time P a t t e r n s in Discharge A r b i t r a t i o n s by Board Composition  49  Comparative R e s u l t s of Discharge Outcomes  56  12. 13. 14. 15.  A r b i t r a t i o n P r o p e n s i t i e s by Industry  46  Arbitration  The A r b i t r a l D i s p o s i t i o n in B r i t i s h Columbia  of Discharge  The  of Discharge  Arbitral Disposition  ..40  Arbitrations 56  in B r i t i s h Columbia by Year  Grievances 60  16.  Outcome by Employee Status  61  17.  Outcome by S e n i o r i t y  62  18.  Outcome by D i s c i p l i n a r y Record  64  19.  Outcome by Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l  66  20.  Outcome by Occupation  68  vi  21.  Outcome by A r b i t r a l Experience  69  22.  Outcome by Board Composition  70  23.  Outcome by Industry  71  24.  Outcome by O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment  74  25.  O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment by D i s c i p l i n a r y Record of the Grievant Sample  77  vi i  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of t h i s t h e s i s comes some four years a f t e r the p r o j e c t the like  was i n i t i a t e d .  encouragement  Throughout that p e r i o d  I received  and support of many f a c u l t y members.  I would  i n p a r t i c u l a r to thank my t h e s i s chairman, Dr. N.A. H a l l ,  for the many hours he spent l i s t e n i n g , reading, and p r o v i d i n g valuable  comment.  I would a l s o l i k e to thank Dr. A. Ponak,  Mr. D.C. M c P h i l l i p s , Dr. C. F r a s e r ,  and Dr. M. Thompson f o r the  time and e f f o r t they spent while members of my t h e s i s Finally,  I would l i k e to thank the U n i v e r s i t y  computer  f a c i l i t i e s a v a i l a b l e to me.  the p r o j e c t  would not have proceeded.  committee.  f o r making i t s  Without t h i s  assistance  1  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Among t h e more v i s i b l e reports able  those of u n o r g a n i z e d And  1  settlements,  against example.  against  appear  to a board  dismissal.  benefit  overlooked.  2  The  in service  practically  Union  under  t o d i s m i s s may  the consequences break  than  to  of  Protection good  no  members d i s m i s s e d  however, have t h e i r whose  case  authority  be o v e r t u r n e d .  t o s u c h an a p p e a l p r o c e d u r e  because  reaching.  may,  of a r b i t r a t i o n  management's d e c i s i o n Access  t o be  undisputed benefits  l a b o u r i n Canada has  reasons considered u n f a i r  appealed  are  higher  d i s c h a r g e s t a n d s o u t as a p a r t i c u l a r l y  arbitrary  are  of t h e v e r y c o n s p i c o u s n a t u r e of wage  some of t h e more b a s i c ,  Unorganized  recourse  unions  l a b o u r i s , however, a q u e s t i o n open  y e t , because  arbitrary  That  members w i t h wages r e l a t i v e l y  u n i o n membership, o f t e n  for  of t r a d e u n i o n a c t i v i t y  of newly n e g o t i a t e d wage i n c r e a s e s .  to provide t h e i r  debate.  signs  represents a very  of a d i s m i s s a l results  can  real  be f a r  i n the e l i m i n a t i o n  of  ^ e e f o r example H.G. L e w i s , "The E f f e c t s of U n i o n s on I n d u s t r i a l Wage D i f f e r e n t i a l s , " i n A s p e c t s of L a b o r Economics ( P r i n c e t o n : U n i v . o f P r i n c e t o n P r e s s , 1962), pp. 319-341; A l b e r t Rees, The E c o n o m i c s o f T r a d e U n i o n s ( C h i c a g o : U n i v . of C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1962), pp. 69-96. S e e P a u l M a l l e s , C a n a d i a n L a b o u r S t a n d a r d s i n Law, A g r e e m e n t , and P r a c t i c e ( O t t a w a : E c o n o m i c C o u n c i l o f Canada, 1 9 7 6 ) , p. 86. . 2  2  accumulated s e n i o r i t y and service. should  The  the b e n e f i t s pegged to that measure of  p o t e n t i a l for f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s  a l t e r n a t i v e employers become aware of the d i s m i s s a l  refuse to o f f e r employment because of p e r c e i v e d risks.  The  seriousness  the e x i s t e n c e labour  looms l a r g e  market.  of that problem may  of a family to care No  be magnified with  I t i s not  economic c a p i t a l punishment.  costs-  the realm of  come to be equated with  T h i s , no doubt, was  Reynold's reason f o r c o n c l u d i n g a r b i t r a r y discharge  has  that, "Protection  Lloyd against  i s probably the most important  single  b e n e f i t which the worker secures from trade unionism. more than anything plant."  e l s e to make him  a tight  from a  s u r p r i s i n g then, that w i t h i n  i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e , discharge  and  be the p s y c h i c  s o c i a l embarrassment, d e m o r a l i z a t i o n — r e s u l t i n g dismissal.  disciplinary  f o r , debts to pay,  l e s s important may  and  a free c i t i z e n  I t does  in the  3  Interest  i n t h i s t h e s i s was  sparked by the observation  that  in l e s s than o n e - t h i r d of those d i s m i s s a l s taken to a r b i t r a t i o n in B r i t i s h Columbia were employers' d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s T h i s f i n d i n g appeared to q u e s t i o n B r i t i s h Columbia to administer with the e x p e c t a t i o n s l i t e r a t u r e served  the a b i l i t y of managers in  discipline  of a r b i t r a t o r s .  only to strengthen  conducted i n the United  States and  upheld.  in a manner c o n s i s t e n t  A review of  the  that c o n t e n t i o n .  the Province  of  Studies  Ontario  demonstrated that employers in those j u r i s d i c t i o n s were approximately 50 percent  3  ed.  more s u c c e s s f u l than t h e i r  British  L l y o d G. Reynolds, Labor Economics and Labor R e l a t i o n s , (Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1965), p. 208.  5th'  3  Columbia c o u n t e r p a r t s i n having d i s m i s s a l s upheld by arbi trators. The  literature  search a l s o brought a t t e n t i o n to the f a c t  that research i n t o i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e discharge  i n g e n e r a l , and  i n p a r t i c u l a r , has remained a r e l a t i v e l y  area of a n a l y s i s .  neglected  T h i s i s somewhat s u r p r i s i n g given the  prominent p o s i t i o n grievance a r b i t r a t i o n holds i n North i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s , and the sheer numerical discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s . narrow i n scope.  4  s i g n i f i c a n c e of  Those s t u d i e s that do e x i s t are r a t h e r  Research has been c h a n n e l l e d p r i m a r i l y  d i r e c t i o n of examining management's record before boards. But,  American  i n the  arbitration  The importance of such q u e r i e s i s not i n q u e s t i o n .  there are other more b a s i c a s p e c t s of d i s c h a r g e cases that  have remained unexamined. The  o b j e c t i v e of t h i s t h e s i s i s t o examine those  areas through awards f i l e d  a comprehensive a n a l y s i s of d i s c h a r g e  arbitration  i n the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia d u r i n g the  years 1974 through fronts.  unexplored  1977.  The p r o j e c t w i l l proceed  along two  F i r s t , a d e s c r i p t i v e a n a l y s i s w i l l be undertaken.  The  f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s were asked: 1. What was the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the g r i e v o r sample on the b a s i s of sex? I t was hypothesized that a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y l a r g e number of the g r i e v o r s would be males. 2. What was the o c c u p a t i o n a l compostion of the g r i e v a n t sample? Blue c o l l a r workers, i t was hypothesized, would account f o r the overwhelming m a j o r i t y of the g r i e v o r s . 3.  Were the g r i e v o r s of many or few years s e n i o r i t y ?  I t was  D i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s c u r r e n t l y account f o r approximately 20 percent of a l l grievance a r b i t r a t i o n s i n B r i t i s h Columbia, a f i g u r e c o n s i s t e n t with f i n d i n g s i n other North American jurisdictions. 4  4  hypothesized that the vast m a j o r i t y few years s e n i o r i t y . 4. What was the d i s c i p l i n a r y of the discharge?  of the g r i e v o r s would have  record of the g r i e v o r s at the  5.  To what unions d i d the g r i e v o r s belong?  6.  How  7.  What were the major causes f o r  many of the g r i e v o r s held o f f i c i a l  time  union p o s i t i o n s ?  dismissal?  8. Did any r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t between o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s and causes f o r d i s m i s s a l . It was hypothesized that white c o l l a r workers would be more apt to be dismissed f o r reasons r e l a t e d to how t h e i r work was performed. For blue c o l l a r workers t h i s would not be the case. 9. What was the frequency of d i s m i s s a l s across i n d u s t r i e s ? I t was hypothesized that c e r t a i n i d e n t i f i a b l e i n d u s t r i e s would generate a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y high share of a l l the d i s m i s s a l s contained i n the sample. 10. What was the labour organ i z a t ions?  f o r c e s i z e of the  dismissing  11. What impact d i d t r i p a r t i t e boards of a r b i t r a t i o n as opposed to s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s have on the time r e q u i r e d to s e t t l e arbitrated dismissals? Answers to these and o b j e c t i v e of the t h e s i s . p r o v i d i n g an e x p l a n a t i o n  s i m i l a r questions Attention w i l l f o r the  will  fulfill  then s h i f t  seemingly low  The  desired  to i s o l a t e those f a c t o r s which appeared most  instrumental  i n producing the  After a preliminary of the  toward  percentage of  d i s m i s s a l s upheld by a r b i t r a t o r s i n t h i s p r o v i n c e . goal was  one  set of a r b i t r a l outcomes observed.  scanning of the sample of awards, a review  l i t e r a t u r e , and  d i s c u s s i o n s with committee members, a  v a r i e t y of f a c t o r s to be used i n the a n a l y s i s were decided  upon.  In a few  had  their  instances  roots  the source of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s s t u d i e d  i n the l i t e r a t u r e .  of l i t e r a t u r e  in t h i s area,  However, because of the  i t seemed a p p r o p r i a t e  paucity  to study  p r e v i o u s l y unexplored r e l a t i o n s h i p s which a l s o appeared to  be  5  significant.  L i s t e d below are the v a r i a b l e s that were employed  in attempting  to e x p l a i n the p a t t e r n of a r b i t r a l  observed  in B r i t i s h  outcomes  Columbia:  1. The g r i e v o r s ' employment s t a t u s . Probationary employees were, as a group, expected to have had a g r e a t e r percentage of t h e i r d i s m i s s a l s upheld compared to those employees who had attained seniority rights. 2. The g r i e v o r s ' s e n i o r i t y . It was hypothesized that an i n v e r s e r e l a t i o n s h i p would e x i s t between the g r i e v o r s ' s e n i o r i t y and the l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s m i s s a l being upheld. 3. The g r i e v o r s ' d i s c i p l i n a r y r e c o r d s . I t was hypothesized that the more t a r n i s h e d a g r i e v o r ' s work r e c o r d the l e s s l i k e l y a reinstatement order would be awarded. 4. The cause f o r d i s m i s s a l . As a general r u l e a r b i t r a t o r s demand a high degree of proof before upholding d i s m i s s a l s r e l a t e d to work performance. I t was hypothesized, t h e r e f o r e , that employees dismissed f o r reasons r e l a t e d to work performance would stand a b e t t e r than average chance of being r e i n s t a t e d . 5. The g r i e v o r s ' occupations. There was no a p r i o r i reason to suspect the e x i s t e n c e of a r e l a t i o n s h i p between the a r b i t r a l d i s p o s i t i o n of discharge g r i e v a n c e s and the g r i e v o r s ' occupations. 6. The experience of a r b i t r a t o r s . A t e s t was made to determine whether the d e c i s i o n s of those a r b i t r a t o r s widely used d i f f e r e d to a s i g n i f i c a n t degree from those a r b i t r a t o r s used s p a r i n g l y . 7. The composition of the a r b i t r a t i o n board. A t e s t was conducted to determine whether the d e c i s i o n s of s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from those of t r i p a r t i t e boards of arbitration. 8. The i n d u s t r i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the i n d u s t r y from which the g r i e v o r s were d i s m i s s e d . There was no a p r i o r i reason to expect that t h i s v a r i a b l e would be i n s t r u m e n t a l i n e x p l a i n i n g the p a t t e r n of outcomes observed. 9. The labour f o r c e s i z e of the d i s m i s s i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n . I t was hypothesized that the l a r g e r the o r g a n i z a t i o n the more l i k e l y management's d e c i s i o n to d i s m i s s would be upheld. The g r e a t e r l i k l i h o o d of f i n d i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l labour r e l a t i o n p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n l a r g e o r g a n i z a t i o n s formed the b a s i s of t h i s hypothesis. F i v e chapters f o l l o w t h i s , the i n t r o d u c t i o n . i s concerned concept  Chapter  with the methodological aspects of the study.  of c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e  i s d i s c u s s e d i n chapter  two The  three  6  as i s the l e g i s l a t i v e  framework w i t h i n which labour  in B r i t i s h Columbia operates.  Chapter  d e s c r i p t i v e a n a l y s i s of the p a r t i e s a r b i t r a t i o n process. discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s five.  Conclusions  four presents  i n v o l v e d i n the  arbitration the discharge  An a n a l y s i s of the a r b i t r a l d i s p o s t i o n of i n B r i t i s h Columbia appears i n chapter  reached  are d i s c u s s e d in chapter s i x .  7  CHAPTER II RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The criteria  o b j e c t i v e of t h i s chapter i s to f i r s t  used i n s e l e c t i n g the a r b i t r a t i o n awards  most a p p r o p r i a t e information  considered  f o r t h i s study, and to then d e s c r i b e the  which was sought from those awards. The  The  d i s c u s s the  Sample  p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s i n t h i s study i s c o n f i n e d  years 1974 through 1977.  t o the  Three c r i t e r i a were used i n a r r i v i n g  at that d e c i s i o n : 1.  The a v a i l a b i l i t y of a l a r g e number of awards.  2.  Choosing a p e r i o d during which l e g i s l a t i v e c o u l d be considered constant.  3.  S e l e c t i n g a sample as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as p o s s i b l e of the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of d i s m i s s a l s . The  was  conditions  a v a i l a b i l i t y of awards p r i o r t o 1974 was l i m i t e d . I t  not u n t i l that year with the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the Labour Code  of B r i t i s h Columbia that a r b i t r a t o r s became l e g a l l y o b l i g a t e d t o f u r n i s h a w r i t t e n copy of t h e i r award.  Although Western Labour  A r b i t r a t i o n Cases began i t s coverage of awards i n 1966, i t was considered The  awards contained  could but  methodologically  i n a d v i s a b l e t o r e l y on t h i s  source.  i n that p u b l i c a t i o n have been e d i t e d and  s u f f e r from omissions of f a c t  important f o r t h i s  not n e c e s s a r i l y f o r the readers of W.L.A.C.  study,  Moreover, i n  8  v i o l a t i o n of c r i t e r i a  three above, the number of awards  reviewed  in W.L.A.C. r e p r e s e n t s a sample of unknown p r o p o r t i o n to the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of discharge awards. With regards to the second marked c o n t r a s t to e a r l i e r power of s u b s t i t u t i o n  criterion,  legislation,  granted a r b i t r a t o r s  in d i s m i s s a l cases.  the outcome of awards governed by d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s would be While  the Labour Code i n  To attempt  to analyze  legislative  illogical.  a d m i t t e d l y of short d u r a t i o n the p e r i o d 1974-1977  d i d , n e v e r t h e l e s s , o f f e r a u n i v e r s e of over 200 awards.  A l l d i s c h a r g e awards recorded  arbitration  i n the M i n i s t r y of  Labour's Annual Index of A r b i t r a t i o n Awards f o r the years 1977  the  1974-  were i n c l u d e d i n the sample with the f o l l o w i n g e x c e p t i o n s :  1.  Discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s governed by p r o v i s i o n s other those of the Labour Code of B r i t i s h Columbia.  than  2.  Grievances which were abandoned at the a r b i t r a t i o n h e a r i n g , or c o n s i d e r e d by the a r b i t r a t o r to be untimely.  3.  Awards d e a l i n g with managerial a c t i o n s not d i s c i p l i n a r y i n the s t r i c t e s t sense of the word. F a l l i n g i n t h i s category were c o n t e s t e d q u i t s , d i s m i s s a l s due to l a c k of work, and d i s m i s s a l s a r i s i n g out of mental or p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t i e s of an employee.  4.  E i g h t u n a t t a i n a b l e awards f o r the year  1977.  I d e a l l y , t h i s study would c o n s i s t of a l l d i s m i s s a l s : those which were g r i e v e d and those l e f t uncontested,  those which were  s e t t l e d or abandoned at some p o i n t i n the grievance and those which were taken to a r b i t r a t i o n .  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , only  the number of d i s m i s s a l s that went the a r b i t r a t i o n known with c e r t a i n t y .  procedure,  route are  What p r o p o r t i o n t h i s category  of a l l d i s m i s s a l s remains unknown.  comprises  The development of an.  hypothesis i n t h i s regard i s even a d i f f i c u l t  task.  The  number  9  of d i s m i s s a l s which reach a r b i t r a t i o n depends l a r g e l y on how d i s c r i m i n a t i n g unions wish particular case.  1  to be i n d e c i d i n g the m e r i t s of a  There i s some room f o r v a r i a t i o n here.  are s u r e l y some unions which as a matter  of general p o l i c y  to a l l d i s c h a r g e d employees the r i g h t to have t h e i r brought  before a board of a r b i t r a t i o n .  which may, q u i t e j u s t i f i a b l y , proceed s p e c i a l circumstances. to f a i r l y  Given  There grant  grievance  There are other  unions  t o a r b i t r a t i o n only under  the l e g a l o b l i g a t i o n unions have  represent b a r g a i n i n g u n i t members one would suspect  that the m e r i t s of a grievance would have 'to be n o t i c e a b l y l a c k i n g before a grievance would be allowed to d i e i n the grievance procedure. i s simply unknown.  The extent t o which t h i s Thus, a caveat  i s i n order.  awards being analyzed may or may not r e f l e c t  i s t r u e , however, The a r b i t r a t i o n  the general  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p o p u l a t i o n of a l l d i s m i s s a l s . be taken  i n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e s u l t s not to extend any  c o n c l u s i o n s beyond the boundaries without  Care must  first  of the sample being analyzed  c o n s i d e r i n g the f a c t o r s d i s c u s s e d above.  Data C o l l e c t i o n To undertake collect  the proposed  a n a l y s i s an attempt  was made to  the f o l l o w i n g d a t a :  1.  The sex of the g r i e v o r .  2.  The s e n i o r i t y of the g r i e v o r .  3.  The occupation of the g r i e v o r .  (The o c c u p a t i o n a l  ^ o r some i n s i g h t s i n t o that process see Donald J . Peterson, "Why Unions go to A r b i t r a t i o n , " Personnel, 48, No.4 (1971), 4447.  10  classification  scheme used  i s d e s c r i b e d i n Appendix  4.  Whether the g r i e v o r h e l d any  5.  The cause f o r d i s m i s s a l .  official  union  1.)  position.  Where m u l t i p l e reasons were given  by the employer, the cause upon which the case hinged was  the  one  recorded.  6.  The  union and  7.  The  number of ( B r i t i s h Columbia) members i n the union  local  named i n the award. and  l o c a l named i n the award. 8.  The  name of the a r b i t r a t o r .  9.  The composition  of the a r b i t r a t i o n board  a r b i t r a t o r or t r i p a r t i t e 10.  ( i . e . single  board).  Whether i n the case of multi-member boards of a r b i t r a t i o n  an unanimous d e c i s i o n was 11.  reached.  The a r b i t r a t i o n board's d e c i s i o n .  as f o l l o w s : d i s c h a r g e upheld, (i.e.  a d i s m i s s a l reduced  partial  back pay  Outcomes were c l a s s i f i e d  reinstatement with no back pay  to a suspension), reinstatement  ( i . e . a d i s m i s s a l reduced  with  to a p e r i o d of  suspension with the employer reimbursing the g r i e v o r f o r any earnings l o s t  between the l a s t day  of that suspension and  date of the a r b i t r a t o r ' s award), and back  pay.  12.  The date of d i s c h a r g e .  13.  The e l a p s e d time  (in 15.  The  full  ( i n days) between the date of d i s c h a r g e  and the date of the f i r s t 14.  reinstatement with  the  a r b i t r a t i o n hearing.  number of a r b i t r a t i o n hearings and the p e r i o d of  time  days) over which the hearings o c c u r r e d . The e l a p s e d time between the l a s t a r b i t r a t i o n hearing  the date on which the p a r t i e s were n o t i f i e d of the board's  and  11  decision.  Unless otherwise s p e c i f i e d i n the w r i t t e n d e c i s i o n ,  the date of n o t i f i c a t i o n was assumed to be the date of the award. 16.  The sector of the economy ( i . e . p u b l i c or p r i v a t e )  the employer operated.  Included  i n the p u b l i c sector were the  p r o v i n c i a l government, crown c o r p o r a t i o n s , governments, and p u b l i c h e a l t h 17.  The  of the employer named i n the  (A d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the i n d u s t r i a l  scheme adopted i s provided 18.  municipal  facilities.  The i n d u s t r i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  award.  The labour  i n which  classification  i n Appendix 2.)  f o r c e s i z e of the employer named i n the award.  focus here was on the number of employees i n the t o t a l  organization.  Thus, the number of i n d i v i d u a l s employed i n a l l  of MacMillan B l o e d e l ' s s i z e of the labour  operations  was recorded  regardless  of the  f o r c e at the s i t e at which the d i s m i s s a l  arose. Employment by t o t a l organzation On  was chosen f o r two reasons.  p r a c t i c a l grounds the number of employees by t o t a l  organization  was by-and-large the only  data w a s ^ a v a i l a b l e .  T h e o r e t i c a l concerns a l s o suggested  employment by t o t a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , suitable.  l e v e l a t which employment that  r a t h e r than p l a n t , was more  Employment f i g u r e s were to serve  p r i m a r i l y as a gauge  to measure the degree of managerial s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n matters of industrial  relations.  There was assumed t o be a d i r e c t  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the number of employees and i n d u s t r i a l relations expertise.  I t was f u r t h e r assumed that  dismissals  made at the p l a n t  l e v e l would be made i n compliance with an  o v e r a l l corporate  policy.  Therefore,  total  organizational  12  employment was  assumed to be the l e v e l best  s u i t e d to gauging  the degree of competency in matters of labour Three sources employment.  The  were r e l i e d upon i n o b t a i n i n g estimates  most v a l u a b l e of these was  B r a d s t r e e t p u b l i c a t i o n Canadian Key remaining  estimates  through telephone  relations.  the Dun  Business  of  and  Directory.  The  were found in the awards themselves or  conversations  with the employers named in the  awards. 19.  Whether the g r i e v o r ' s d i s c i p l i n a r y  whether the g r i e v o r had  record was  at some previous  c l e a n or  time been d i s c i p l i n e d .  If the l a t t e r were t r u e , the e a r l i e r d i s c i p l i n e was as e i t h e r being  f o r an o f f e n s e r e l a t e d or u n r e l a t e d to the  misconduct which prompted the d i s m i s s a l . specific  type of d i s c i p l i n e  imposed was  In both cases  Unless  s p e c i f i c s of the g r i e v o r ' s previous d i s c i p l i n a r y  No attempt was  i n d i v i d u a l ' s work r e c o r d was  average.  not  develop and  that of choosing  be  apply.  or above or below  imposed but  i n the process  of the data  a n a l y s i s proved to be a troublesome task.  both r i c h i n d e t a i l and  that  of  recorded.  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and coding  problems was  recorded  statements to the e f f e c t  poor, f a i r ,  In a d d i t i o n , d i s c i p l i n e  being g r i e v e d was The  r e c o r d were  made to c a t e g o r i z e p r i o r  d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s from general an  the  r e f e r r e d to in the award the i n f o r m a t i o n was  as m i s s i n g .  the  c l a s s i f e d as a v e r b a l  warning, a w r i t t e n warning, or a suspension.  explicitly  categorized  One  classification  f o r computer of the  foremost  schemes which were  at the same time r e l a t i v e l y easy to  There were i n s t a n c e s where the b e n e f i t s to  d e r i v e d from d e t a i l e d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  schemes seemed m i n i s c u l e  13  in r e l a t i o n  to the e f f o r t r e q u i r e d to develop them.  cases more streamlined  In these  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n schemes were adopted.  For  example, no p r o v i s i o n s were made to record a l l the forms i n which an employer may have d i s c i p l i n e d an employee.  Only the  most b a s i c system of d i s c i p l i n a r y p e n a l t i e s — a v e r b a l warning followed  by a w r i t t e n warning followed  adopted. only  Similarly,  the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s  i f they could be p l a c e d  categories  were  recorded  i n t o one of the four outcome  developed.  Obviously,  the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n  awards i n t o a machine readable information  by a s u s p e n s i o n — w a s  being  left  i n the  form r e s u l t e d i n some r e l e v a n t  unrecorded.  e x e r c i s e s of t h i s type.  of the data contained  T h i s i s a common problem i n  However, there was no reason to b e l i e v e  that those e x c l u s i o n s were s i g n i f i c a n t enough to a l t e r the overall  f i n d i n g s of t h i s  thesis.  14  CHAPTER 3 THE  PHILOSOPHICAL AND LEGISLATIVE APPROACHES TO INDUSTRIAL DISCIPLINE  The c e n t r a l concern  in t h i s chapter  i s to o u t l i n e  the  l e g i s l a t i v e c o n d i t i o n s governing the a r b i t r a t i o n of d i s c h a r g e grievances i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  The  chapter begins with a  d i s c u s s i o n of the c u r r e n t philosophy of d i s c i p l i n e w i t h i n an i n d u s t r i a l environment, which i s intended to serve as a backdrop a g a i n s t which the development of l e g i s l a t i v e c o n d i t i o n s can b e t t e r understood.  be  A f t e r d e s c r i b i n g the a p p r o p r i a t e  l e g i s l a t i o n , a t t e n t i o n w i l l t u r n t o a d e s c r i p t i o n of a r b i t r a t o r s are expected  to apply the  how  law.  The Concept of C o r r e c t i v e D i s c i p l i n e The  safe and e f f i c i e n t  producing concern  service  i s to a c e r t a i n extent dependent upon a  d i s c i p l i n e d labour f o r c e . always guarantee  o p e r a t i o n of any goods or  Human nature, being what i t i s , w i l l  that there i s a small group of employees  who  are c h r o n i c a l l y l a t e , n e g l i g e n t i n t h e i r d u t i e s , i n s u b o r d i n a t e to t h e i r s u p e r v i s o r s , and  so f o r t h .  F a i l u r e to s u b j e c t  employees of t h i s s o r t to some form of d i s c i p l i n e may l o s s of output and  lead to a  sales.  A program of employee d i s c i p l i n e a l l o w s an employer to maintain  i n d u s t r i a l order by s e t t i n g  l i m i t s on  individual  15  behaviour.  T r a d i t i o n a l l y , managers viewed i n d u s t r i a l  w i t h i n a punishment o r i e n t e d  discipline  framework:  T r a n s g r e s s i o n s were guarded a g a i n s t by open or t a c i t t h r e a t s of punishment i n some form. The fear motive was the one p r i n c i p a l l y appealed t o , and submissiveness and d o c i l i t y were looked upon as c a r d i n a l v i r t u e s . Punishment when i t came was s w i f t , f i r m , not to be appealed from. 1  These r e t r i b u t i o n i s t aspects of i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e have found no home w i t h i n relations.  the c o l l e c t i v e bargaining  The dominant theme of i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e has  become one of c o r r e c t i o n . corrective discipline stronger be  era of i n d u s t r i a l  Simply s t a t e d , the p r i n c i p l e of  r e q u i r e s that managers apply  progressively  doses of d i s c i p l i n e to an e r r a n t employee u n t i l  i t can  f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d that l e s s e r p e n a l t i e s f a i l e d t o evoke the  d e s i r e d response. appropriate The  At that point discharge  becomes the  penalty.  most o v e r r i d i n g aspect  that d i s c i p l i n e ,  of the c o r r e c t i o n a l theme i s  i n c l u d i n g d i s m i s s a l , i s not p u n i t i v e .  As a  noted author has s t a t e d : Discharge, c a t a s t r o p h i c as i t may be, does not c o n s t i t u t e punishment. Concededly i t i s s a c r i l e g i o u s t o oppose such time-honored l o c u t i o n s as "the u l t i m a t e s a n c t i o n , " "the f i n a l p e n a l t y , " and " i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l punishment." But the f a c t i s that a worker i s f i r e d because the employer has decided, r i g h t l y or wrongly, that he i s not g e t t i n g what he bargained f o r  Ordway Tead, Human Nature and Management (New York: McGrawH i l l , 1933), p.271. The author went on to e x p l a i n the need f o r an a l t e r n a t i v e approach to i n d u s t r i a l d i s c l i p l i n e : "The theory on which p e n a l i t e s should be devised and administered should be one of c o n s t r u c t i v e c o r r e c t i o n and not of v i n d i c t i v e n e s s . " This appears to be one of the f i r s t r e f e r e n c e s to i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e as a c o r r e c t i v e t o o l . x  16  and that he wants to c l o s e out relat ionship.  the  employment  2  The  concept of c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e  underpinnings in the b e l i e f only  to an employee, but  finds i t s  that a d i s m i s s a l can  to an employer as w e l l .  stands to lose investments i n the dismissed of recruitment,  be c o s t l y not  s e l e c t i o n , and  The  employee in the  t r a i n i n g expenditures.  t a n g i b l e , but c e r t a i n l y important, i s the e f f e c t the may  have on  need not  the  r e s t of the employer's work f o r c e .  form  Less dismissal These c o s t s  always be r e a l i z e d , however, i f through a system of  progressive  d i s c i p l i n e the e r r a n t employee i s allowed to l e a r n  from h i s mistakes and organization.  to apply  those lessons w i t h i n  Only for the most s e r i o u s of  (e.g. t h e f t ) might a program of p r o g r e s s i v e abandoned. other  employer  Here, summary discharge  may  be  the same  offenses discipline r e q u i r e d to  be deter  employees from engaging in s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s . These arguments, in support of the d o c t r i n e of c o r r e c t i v e  d i s c i p l i n e , have a heavy t h e o r e t i c a l content.  There are,  however, many p o s i t i v e , p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s to  administering  corrective  discipline:  One of the advantages to adopting a c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n a r y approach i s that i t enables the p a r t i e s to know where they stand with each other. An employee who i s subject to c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e knows that a f t e r r e c e i v i n g a warning he may r e c e i v e a suspension and that a f t e r a suspension he may be discharged i f he repeats an o f f e n s e . F u r t h e r , where the employer maintains a system  A r t h u r M. Ross, " D i s c u s s i o n " of Sanford H. Kadish, "The C r i m i n a l Law and I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e as S a n c t i o n i n g Systems:Some Comparative O b s e r v a t i o n s , " in Labor A r b i t r a t i o n P e r s p e c t i v e s and Problems. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting. N a t i o n a l Academy of A r b i t r a t o r s . (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of N a t i o n a l A f f a i r s , 1964), p. 147. 2  17  of d i s c i p l i n e an employee may g r i e v e when . d i s c i p l i n e i s imposed, which prevents s t a l e i n c i d e n t s from being r e s u r r e c t e d on a subsequent o c c a s i o n . In t h i s type of system an employee i s given the o p p o r t u n i t y to c l e a r h i s record through the grievance a r b i t r a t i o n procedure at the time of the i n c i d e n t and i f he i s not s u c c e s s f u l he i s put on n o t i c e that h i s past r e c o r d w i l l be h e l d a g a i n s t him. 3  Finally,  i t can not be s a i d that the c o r r e c t i o n a l theme i s  accepted  wholeheartedly  explicit  statements  by a l l a r b i t r a t o r s .  One  i n t h i s regard i s contained  Western A i r l i n e s and Canadian A i r l i n e and  of the more i n P a c i f ic  Employers'  A s s o c i a t i o n , where the a r b i t r a t o r s t a t e d : One d e f e c t of the " c o r r e c t i o n a l d i s c i p l i n e " d o c t r i n e i s that i t moves c o r r e c t i o n a l theory from the c r i m i n a l process to the i n d u s t r i a l . There are t r a i n e d personnel and f a c i l i t i e s i n the c r i m i n a l process which are not a v a i l a b l e i n the i n d u s t r i a l process, and i n s i t u a t i o n s where the employee's problems are d e t r i m e n t a l to f e l l o w employees, these f e l l o w employees are being asked to be unpaid p r o b a t i o n o f f i c e r s , a job f o r which they d i d not ask and f o r which they are not being p a i d . 4  The L e g i s l a t i v e Framework  The  Labour Code of B r i t i s h Columbia,  s e c t i o n 112,  i n s e c t i o n s 92  5  s p e l l s out the procedures  of r i g h t s d i s p u t e s .  S e c t i o n s 93(1)  and  governing 98(d)  c.33,  s.23]  S e c t i o n 93(1)  settling  [rep. & sub.,  S.B.C.  1975,  states:  N o r t h York General H o s p i t a l .and C.U.G.E. (1973), (2d) 46 (Shime). 3  Unreported,  (J.M. M a c l n t y r e ) , J u l y 22,  S.B.C. 1973  (2nd S e s s . ) , c."l22.  5  arbitration  are of the utmost  importance to a r b i t r a t o r s faced with the task of contested d i s m i s s a l s .  the  through  1976.  5 L.A.C.  18  93.(1) Every c o l l e c t i v e agreement s h a l l c o n t a i n a p r o v i s i o n governing the d i s m i s s a l or d i s c i p l i n e of an employee bound by the agreement, and that p r o v i s i o n or another p r o v i s i o n , s h a l l r e q u i r e that the employer have a j u s t and reasonable cause for the d i s m i s s a l or d i s c l i p l i n e of an employee; but nothing in t h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l p r o h i b i t the p a r t i e s to a c o l l e c t i v e agreement from i n c l u d i n g t h e r e i n a d i f f e r e n t p r o v i s i o n for employment of c e r t a i n employees on a p r o b a t i o n a r y basis. In s e c t i o n Code the  98(d)  |rep.  & sub.,  S.B.C. 1975,  c.33,  s.27]  remedial powers of an a r b i t r a t i o n board are  of  the  described:  98. For the purposes set out i n s e c t i o n 92, an a r b i t r a t i o n board has a l l the a u t h o r i t y to p r o v i d e a f i n a l and c o n c l u s i v e settlement of a d i s p u t e a r i s i n g under the p r o v i s i o n s of a c o l l e c t i v e agreement, and without l i m i t i n g the g e n e r a l i t y of the foregoing has authority: (d)to determine that a d i s m i s s a l or d i s c i p l i n e i s e x c e s s i v e in a l l the circumstances of the case and s u b s t i t u t e such other measures as appears j u s t and e q u i t a b l e . The section  authority 92,  relevant  conferred  upon a r b i t r a t i o n boards i s found i n  where the p o l i c y of the Code i s d i s c u s s e d .  sections  The  state:  92.(2) It i s the i n t e n t and purpose of t h i s part that i t s p r o v i s i o n s c o n s t i t u t e a method and procedure for determining g r i e v a n c e s and r e s o l v i n g d i s p u t e s under the p r o v i s i o n s of a c o l l e c t i v e agreement without r e s o r t to stoppages of work. (3)An a r b i t r a t i o n board s h a l l , in f u r t h e r a n c e of the i n t e n t and purposes expressed in subsection (2), have regard to the r e a l substance of the matters i n d i s p u t e and the r e s p e c t i v e merit of the p o s i t i o n s of the p a r t i e s t h e r e t o under the terms of the agreement, and s h a l l apply p r i n c i p l e s c o n s i s t e n t with the i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p o l i c y of t h i s Act, and i s not bound by a s t r i c t l e g a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the issue i n d i s p u t e . The  s i g n i f i c a n c e of s e c t i o n  o u t l i n e s the dismissal  93(1)  i s twofold.  employer's o b l i g a t i o n s with respect  of employees.  "...have a j u s t and  The  legislation  requires  First, it  to  the  employers to  reasonable cause f o r the d i s m i s s a l  d i s c i p l i n e of an employee;..."  or  I t i s noteworthy i n t h i s  19  connection  that under the common law of master and  employer c o u l d , with reasonable  n o t i c e , or with pay  n o t i c e , d i s m i s s an employee for any The  second s a l i e n t  agreement may employees.  in l i e u of  i s the  the p a r t i e s to a c o l l e c t i v e  adopt to govern the d i s m i s s a l of p r o b a t i o n a r y  In i t s o r i g i n a l  form, s e c t i o n 93(1)  mention of t h i s c l a s s of employee. C a s s i a r Asbestos  C o r p o r a t i o n and  America, L o c a l 6536  6  contained  of  as to whether d i s m i s s a l s of p r o b a t i o n a r y The  1975  ammendments to  followed the Board's a f f i r m a t i v e r e p l y .  form s e c t i o n 93(1)  no  The question arose i n  the United Steelworkers  employees were i n f a c t a r b i t r a b l e . s e c t i o n 93  an  reason.  f e a t u r e of s e c t i o n 93(1)  r e f e r e n c e made to the standards  servant  7  In amended  a l l o w s the p a r t i e s to a c o l l e c t i v e agreement  to p r e s c r i b e a l e s s e r standard than  " j u s t and  reasonable  to apply to employees of a p r o b a t i o n a r y s t a t u s . the c o n t r a c t i s s i l e n t  cause"  I f , however,  i n t h i s regard, a r b i t r a t o r s are free to  c o n s t r u c t a p r o b a t i o n a r y standard of t h e i r own  liking.  What  that standard should be i s a s u b j e c t of disagreement among arbitrators.  8  There appears to be three b a s i c approaches an  a r b i t r a t o r can take.' At one  'B.C.L.R.B. D e c i s i o n No.  extreme i s the agrument that  79/74  (1974).  The Board's d e c i s i o n was r e a f f i r m e d i n a subsequent B.C.L.R.B. D e c i s i o n No. 165/74. 7  those  appeal:  "See Dalton L. Larson, "Probationary Employees," i n Grievance A r b i t r a t i o n : A Review of Current Issues, ed. M.A. H i c k l i n g (Vancouver, B.C.: The I n s t i t u t e of I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , 1977), pp. 77-100. 'See: B r i t i s h Columbia Telephone Company and Telecommunication Workers Union, ( j . W e i l e r ) . As yet unreported but recorded as d e c i s i o n A-163/77 by the A r b i t r a t i o n and S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s Branch of the M i n i s t r y of Labour.  20  standards applied states  to p r o b a t i o n a r y  argument  t h a t employees of a p r o b a t i o n a r y  s t a t u s may  be  cause"  ordinary  98  power of  of  in B r i t i s h  arbitrators  or a l t e r n a t i v e l y ,  g r i e v o r r e i n s t a t e d , with out  of  the  t h e power of specified  improper  warranted  10  substitution.  those  types  1 0  1 1  were, w i t h  R . S . B . C . 1960,  c.  predecessor  disclipline only  two  one  of either  revoked  f o r wages  and lost  enactment  exception,  of employee m i s c o n d u c t  of  the  A dismissal could  With the  to  cases.  courses  if a collective  c o u l d a b o a r d ' s power of  that  dimension  arbitrators  compensation  dismissal.  Only  The  p e n a l t y c o u l d be  total  view  standard.  denied  cases.  the  the  dismissed  that a p p l i e d to  Columbia.  were a l l o w e d  when d e c i d i n g d i s c h a r g e  lies  i n t r o d u c e d a new  i n d i s m i s s a l and  t h e L a b o u r Code a r b i t r a t o r s  was  degree' t h a n  Labour R e l a t i o n s A c t ,  Consequently,  arising  extremes  t h e L a b o u r Code  substitution  upheld,  two  i s t h e most a c c e p t a b l e  arbitration  t h e Code, t h e  the  to a l e s s e r  employees  grievance  be  Between t h e s e  but  Section  action  be  reciprocal  reason.  employees.  similarly  The  without "just  a p p l i c a b l e t o r e g u l a r employees ought  of  granted  agreement  f o r which  substitution  discharge  be  205.  T h e l e g i s l a t i v e d e c i s i o n t o g r a n t a r b i t r a t o r s t h e power of s u b s t i t u t i o n removed t h e l a s t v e s t i g e s of t h e common law of m a s t e r and s e r v a n t w h i c h had s u r f a c e d i n P o r t A r t h u r S h i p b u i l d i n g Co. v. A r t h u r s e t a l . ( 1 9 6 8 ) , 70 D.L.R. ( 2 d ) . In t h a t c a s e t h e Supreme C o u r t of Canada o v e r t u r n e d a d e c i s i o n of t h e O n t a r i o C o u r t of A p p e a l by r u l i n g t h a t i f employee d i s c i p l i n e was j u s t i f i e d t h e form c h o s e n by management was not s u b j e c t t o r e v i e w by a b o a r d of a r b i t r a t i o n . By s t a t u t o r y r e f o r m t h a t r u l i n g has now been o v e r t u r n by a l l C a n a d i a n legislatures. J 1  21  usurped.  12  T h i s one exception appears to have been removed,  however, as a r e s u l t of 1975 a r b i t r a t o r , at l e a s t , has  ammendments to the Code.  One  i n t e r p r e t e d the amended s e c t i o n 98  as  having p r e c i s e l y that e f f e c t : It should be understood that there i s no longer a d i s c r e t i o n in management i n B r i t i s h Columbia to c r e a t e an o f f e n s e for which d i s m i s s a l i s mandatory. A l l d i s c i p l i n e imposed i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s subject to the o v e r r i d i n g d i s c r e t i o n set f o r t h i n s e c t i o n 98 of the Labour C o d e . 13  T h i s then  i s the l e g i s l a t i v e context  in B r i t i s h Columbia have been asked grievances.  to s e t t l e  But what of the procedures  discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s ?  In W.M.  i n which a r b i t r a t o r s discharge  to be f o l l o w e d i n  S c o t t & Company L t d . and  Canadian Food and A l l i e d Workers Union, L o c a l P-162, Labour R e l a t i o n s Board of B r i t i s h Columbia very o u t l i n e d the approach a r b i t r a t o r s should take discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s .  14  the  carefully  in deciding  To use the Board's words:  . . . a r b i t r a t o r s should pose three d i s t i n c t q u e s t i o n s i n the t y p i c a l discharge g r i e v a n c e . F i r s t , has the employee given j u s t and reasonable cause f o r some form of d i s c i p l i n e by the employer? If so, was the employer's d e c i s i o n to d i s m i s s the employee an e x c e s s i v e response i n a l l the circumstances of the case? F i n a l l y , i f the a r b i t r a t o r does c o n s i d e r d i s c h a r g e e x c e s s i v e what a l t e r n a t i v e measure should be substituted? The  Board went on to emphasize that i n answering the second  q u e s t i o n an a r b i t r a t o r must conduct  a particularly  R.B. B i r d , " S u b s t i t u t i o n of P e n a l t i e s Under the Labour Code of B.C.," i n Grievance A r b i t r a t i o n : A Review of Current Problems, ed. M.A. H i c k l i n g ( V a n c o u v e r , B.C.: The I n s t i t u t e of I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , 1977), p. 66. 12  C r a i g m o n t Mines L i m i t e d and U n i t e d Steelworkers L o c a l 6523 (H.A. Hope), unreported. 13  14  B.C.L.R.B. D e c i s i o n No.  46/76.  of America,  22  rigorous  evaluation  of the employer's d i s m i s s a l d e c i s i o n .  number of g u i d e l i n e s , now  A  widely r e f e r r e d to by a r b i t r a t o r s in  B r i t i s h Columbia, were o f f e r e d f o r a s s i s t a n c e : ( i ) How s e r i o u s i s the immediate offense of the employee which p r e c i p i t a t e d the discharge ( f o r example, the c o n t r a s t between t h e f t and absenteeism)? ( i i ) Was the employee's conduct premeditated, or r e p e t i t i v e ; or i n s t e a d , was i t a momentary and emotional a b e r r a t i o n , perhaps provoked by someone e l s e ( f o r example, in a f i g h t between two employees)? ( i i i ) Does the employee have a record of long s e r v i c e with the employer in which he proved an able worker and enjoyed a r e l a t i v e l y f r e e d i s c i p l i n a r y h i s t o r y ? ( i v ) Has the employer attempted e a r l i e r and more moderate forms of c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e of t h i s employee which d i d not prove s u c c e s s f u l in s o l v i n g the problem ( f o r example, of p e r s i s t e n t l a t e n e s s or absenteeism)? (v) Is the discharge of t h i s i n d i v i d u a l employee in accord with the c o n s i s t e n t p o l i c i e s of the employer or does i t appear to s i n g l e out t h i s person for a r b i t r a r y and harsh treatment (an issue which seems to a r i s e p a r t i c u l a r l y in cases of d i s c i p l i n e for w i l d c a t s t r i kes)?  Summary T h i s chapter has discharge  discussed  the  a r b i t r a t i o n , the p h i l o s o p h i c a l r o o t s of  l e g i s l a t i o n , and legislation  some of the p r o c e d u r a l  imposes on a r b i t r a t o r s .  that a n a l y s i s has  been to put  discipline.  failing  An  there  important by-product of  adopt when  the  approach  administering  i s reason to b e l i e v e that many employers  to administer  discipline  i n accordance with Whether any  gathered i n support of that statement w i l l five.  the  Based on the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s i n t h i s  i n t e n t i o n s of the Labour Code.  chapter  that  responsibilities  into perspective  employers i n B r i t i s h Columbia should  province,  l e g i s l a t i v e r u l e s of  are  the  evidence can  be  receive attention in  23-  CHAPTER IV AN ANALYSIS OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE DISCHARGE ARBITRATION- PROCESS In t h i s chapter a number of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the four main p a r t i c i p a n t s  i n the a r b i t r a t i o n p r o c e s s — t h e  grievors,  employers, unions, and a r b i t r a t o r s — w i l l be d i s c u s s e d . turning  Before  t o that a n a l y s i s , a d e s c r i p t i o n of the sample i t s e l f i s  in order.  As shown i n t a b l e 1 the sample c o n s i s t e d  of 216  a r b i t r a t i o n awards, which i n turn d e a l t with 232 g r i e v o r s . t o t a l of 163 employers o p e r a t i n g p r o v i n c e were r e s p o n s i b l e the  grievors,  A  at 181 s i t e s throughout the  f o r the d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n taken.  Of  219 had s e n i o r i t y r i g h t s while 13 g r i e v o r s were of  a p r o b a t i o n a r y status a t the time of d i s m i s s a l . TABLE 1 Sample C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s by Year  YEAR  NUMBER OF AWARDS  NUMBER OF GRIEVORS  1974  35  37  1975  58  65  1976  60  66  1977  63  64  216  232  TOTAL  24  Perhaps the most notable increase and  aspect  in the number of a r b i t r a t i o n s between 1974  the gradual  upward trend t h e r e a f t e r .  more pronounced i f one  The  For  and  That trend  tremendous increase  frequency of a r b i t r a t i o n s was increased  to a l a r g e extent  due  in the to an  number of a r b i t r a t i o n s in the p u b l i c s e c t o r .  of the g r i e v o r s came from the p u b l i c s e c t o r  of 20 percent.  in  servants  rights.  1974. in the 1974  I t appears that  r i g h t s to employees in the  i s making i t s presence f e l t  5.4  i n B r i t i s h Columbia were  c o l l e c t i v e bargaining  the expansion of b a r g a i n i n g sector  Only  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that  marked the year that c i v i l granted formal  1975,  i s even  the remaining years of the a n a l y s i s t h i s f i g u r e was  vicinity  dramatic  r e c a l l s that the sample omits e i g h t  awards for the year 1977.  percent  of t a b l e 1 i s the  i n yet another area  public of  industrial relations.  The Under t h i s heading the disciplinary any  Grievors sex,  occupation,  seniority,  record, cause f o r d i s m i s s a l , union a f f i l i a t i o n ,  union p o s t i o n s  held by the  sample of g r i e v o r s w i l l  and  be  described.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s Roughly 25 percent B r i t i s h Columbia during  by  Sex  of the union members i n the province the p e r i o d 1974-1977 were f e m a l e s .  E s t i m a t e d from f i g u r e s contained of the B.C. Labour D i r e c t o r y .  of  1  in the annual p u b l i c a t i o n s  25  However, only 15 percent of the grievances were taken by females. The reasons  f o r the male domination  p o t e n t i a l l y many. particular  I t may  sample.  of the sample are  simply be a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h i s  On the other hand, the r e s u l t s  may  TABLE 2 D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Sex GRIEVOR'S SEX Female  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY 34  14.7  Male  198  85.3  Total  232  100.0  a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t a p a t t e r n common to any sample of d i s c h a r g e d employees r e g a r d l e s s of j u r i s d i c t i o n and p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s . Analyses  which f o l l o w tend to support  the l a t t e r p r o p o s i t i o n .  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by  Occupation  The occupation of a l l but twenty-three contained  of the g r i e v o r s was  i n the awards sampled (see t a b l e 3).  were g r i e v o r s from white c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n s .  Notably  absent  Over 80 percent of  the g r i e v o r s were, i n f a c t , from the ranks of blue  collar  occupations. Three of the blue c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s — s e r v i c e employees, truck d r i v e r s , and p r o c e s s i n g  occupations—accounted  for almost  one-half of the sample.  Of the g r i e v o r s whose  occupation  i t was to provide a s e r v i c e , 10 h e l d p o s i t i o n s  TABLE 3  26  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Occupation  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  OCCUPATION Managerial,  4  1.9  2  1.0  2  1.0  4  1.9  2  1.0  15  7.2  6  2.9  Service  26  12.4  Logging  11  5.3  2  1.0  39  18.7  2  1.0  • 19  9.1  14  6.7  Truck D r i v e r s  31  14.8  Materials  10  4.8  12  5.7  8  3.8  209  100.0  Social  Administrative  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  Sciences  Teaching Medicine and Art and  Health  Recreation  Clerical Sales  Mining Processing Machining Product  Fabricating  Construction  Trades  Handling  Equipment Operators General  Labour  Total  Note: A d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s used appears i n Appendix 2. r e l a t e d to food and  beverage p r e p a r a t i o n , 4 p r o v i d e d p r o t e c t i v e  s e r v i c e s , 3 s u p p l i e d s e r v i c e s a s s o c i a t e d with l o d g i n g and  9 employees provided  an assortment of  facilites,  miscellaneous  services. One  of the most homogeneous of the nineteen  occupational  27  c a t e g o r i e s was that of truck d r i v i n g .  Although  the g r i e v o r s i n  t h i s category were employed i n a v a r i e t y of i n d u s t r i e s ,  their  d u t i e s and the equipment they operated were i n most cases "very similar.  As a group the g r i e v o r s i n t h i s o c c u p a t i o n a l category  were the most n u m e r i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . P r o c e s s i n g occupations were h e l d by 39 of the g r i e v o r s and, not s u r p r i s i n g l y , 27 of these were r e l a t e d to the manufacture of wood products.  Food and beverage p r o c e s s i n g occupations  accounted f o r ten a d d i t i o n a l d i s c h a r g e cases. Looking next at the d i s t r i b u t i o n of occupations on the b a s i s of sex,  i t was found that women were represented i n only  ten of the nineteen o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s .  The t r a d i t i o n a l  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between occupation and sex were e v i d e n t .  Clerical  p o s i t i o n s were h e l d by 18.8 percent of the women but by only 5.1 percent of the men.  One-quarter of the women i n the sample were  the h o l d e r s of s e r v i c e o c c u p a t i o n s .  J u s t 10.2 percent of the  male g r i e v o r s were i n that o c c u p a t i o n a l group.  The p r o c e s s i n g  occupations were represented by 16.9 and 28.1 percent r e s p e c t i v e l y of the male and female g r i e v o r s .  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by S e n i o r i t y The  f i g u r e s i n t a b l e 4 demonstrate that employees of  relatively  few years s e n i o r i t y appeared more apt t o be dismissed  than employees i n p o s s e s s i o n of longer s e r v i c e r e c o r d s .  2  Nearly  one-half of the g r i e v o r s , whose s e n i o r i t y was known, had a  The p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t s that the f i g u r e s presented i n t a b l e 4 simply r e f l e c t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the work f o r c e . No data e x i s t s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e whether that i s indeed the case. 2  28  s e r v i c e r e c o r d no more than two years i n l e n g t h .  About 80  percent of the sample had no more than f i v e years s e n i o r i t y .  A  mere 8.7 percent of the g r i e v o r s had more than ten years of seniority. TABLE 4 D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by S e n i o r i t y ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  SENIORITY LE 6 months  28  17.5  25  15.6  GT 1 y r . & LE 1.5 y r s .  14  8.7  GT 1.5 y r s . & LE 2 y r s .  11  6.9  GT 2 y r s . & LE 2.5 y r s .  11 •  6.9  GT 2.5 y r s . & LE 3 y r s .  10  6.3  GT 3 y r s . & LE 3.5 y r s .  5  3.1  GT 3.5 y r s . & LE 4 y r s .  12  7.5  GT 4 y r s . & LE 4.5 y r s .  6  3.7  GT 4.5 y r s . & LE 5 y r s .  5  3.1  GT 5 y r s . & LE 7.5 y r s .  12  7.5  GT 7.5 y r s . & LE 10 y r s .  7  4.3  GT 10 y r s . & LE 12 .5 y r s .  4  2.5  GT 12.5 y r s . & LE 15 y r s .  5  3.1  GT 15 y r s . & LE 20 y r s .  5  3.1  160  100.0  GT 6 mo. & LE 1 yr  Total  The  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  •  r e s u l t s are i n no way s u r p r i s i n g .  Employees of many  years' s e n i o r i t y have.much to l o s e should they be d i s m i s s e d . S u r e l y they are aware of t h i s , and.as a r e s u l t , more l i k e l y to  29  conform to the r u l e s of the workplace. r e f l e c t management's a p p r e c i a t i o n  The data may a l s o  of the c o n s i d e r a b l e  investments that are o f t e n made i n employees over a.long  period  of t i m e — i n v e s t m e n t s which may have produced employees whose s k i l l s are d i f f i c u l t that management general  to r e p l a c e .  The data may a l s o i n d i c a t e  i s aware of the f a c t  that a r b i t r a t o r s are as a  r u l e more s e n s i t i v e to the i n t e r e s t s of long  employees than they are to employees of r e l a t i v e l y  service  few years  seniority.  D i s c i p l i n a r y Record of the G r i e v o r s The t a b l e 5. majority  disciplinary  record of the g r i e v o r s i s presented i n  I n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, the r e s u l t s suggest that the of the g r i e v o r s had not proven to be d i s c i p l i n a r y  problems p r i o r to d i s c h a r g e . percent  of the cases,  arbitrators failed  d e c i s i o n s to make e x p l i c i t d i s c i p l i n a r y record. r e c o r d cannot, given  The f i g u r e s show that  reference  in their  i n 47.0  written  to the g r i e v o r ' s p r i o r  F a i l u r e to mention the g r i e v o r ' s work the frequency of occurrence and the  importance of t h i s f a c t o r , be a t t r i b u t e d to o v e r s i g h t s part of a r b i t r a t o r s .  The inescapable  conclusion  on the  i s that when  a r b i t r a t o r s f a i l e d to d i s c u s s the work record of g r i e v o r s i t was because those records explicit  were not s e r i o u s enough to warrant  attention.  If t h i s  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s c o r r e c t , s e r i o u s doubts are cast  over management's e f f i c i e n c y discipline.  i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of  While i t i s u n r e a l i s t i c  to expect an employer to  document every i n f r a c t i o n committed by an employee, the f a c t  30  TABLE 5 D i s c i p l i n a r y Record of the G r i e v o r s DISCIPLINARY RECORD  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  Unrelated  Verbal  9  4.1  Unrelated  Written  9  4.1  Unrelated  Suspension  . 13  5.9  8  3.7  Related  Verbal  Related  Written  23  10.5  Related  Suspension  15  6.8  103  47.0  39  17.8  219  100.0  Previous D i s c i p l i n a r y Record not Discussed Clean  Record  Total  remains that c l o s e to 20 percent  of the g r i e v o r s had c l e a n  disciplinary  15 percent  records.  Less than  been s u b j e c t to d i s c i p l i n e cause f o r d i s m i s s a l . warnings concerning  f o r reasons  Only 21 percent  of the g r i e v o r s had  u n r e l a t e d to the f i n a l had r e c e i v e d previous  o f f e n s e s , which when repeated,  resulted in  dismissal.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Union The  Affiliation  232 g r i e v o r s belonged to f o r t y - t h r e e unions i n t o t a l .  Those unions which represented are l i s t e d  i n t a b l e 6.  a t o t a l of f i v e or more g r i e v o r s  As those  f i g u r e s show, c l o s e to 70  31  percent of the g r i e v o r s h e l d membership i n one of nine Four unions, the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Woodworkers  unions.  of America, the  Teamsters, the United Steelworkers of America,  and the Canadian  Union of P u b l i c Employees, represented 53.8 percent of the grievors.  Twenty-two unions  represented, at most, two g r i e v o r s . TABLE 6  D i s t r i b u t i o n of the G r i e v o r s by Union A f f i l i a t i o n  UNION  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  % OF B.C. UNION MEMBERS  I.W.A.  51  22.0  12.8  Teamsters  40  17.2  5.6  Steelworkers  20  8.6  3.3  C.U.P.E.  14  6.0  6.1  9  3.9  9.3  •9  3.9  3.1  Brewery Workers  7  3.0  0.4  Retail Clerks  6  2.6  2.1  I.U.O.E.  6  2.6  3.2  H.E.U.  5  2.2  4.4  C.A.I.M.A.W.  5  2.2  1.0  172  74.2  51.3  B.C.G.E.U. Hotel-Restaurant  Total  The f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e that some unions accounted  for a  d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y l a r g e share of the g r i e v a n t sample.  The  I.W.A. with l e s s than 13 percent of the union members i n the p r o v i n c e , was the union t o which 22 percent of the g r i e v o r s  32  belonged.  and  3.3  percent of the union members i n the p r o v i n c e accounted  for  and 8.6  The Teamsters and Steelworkers with 5.6  percent r e s p e c t i v e l y of a l l a r b i t r a t e d d i s m i s s a l s .  i s noteworthy  as w e l l , that the second  p r o v i n c e , the B.C.G.E.U., with 9.3 members, accounted  f o r only 3.9  l a r g e s t union  17.2 3  It  i n the  percent of p r o v i n c e ' s union  percent of the d i s m i s s a l s taken  to a r b i t r a t i o n .  Union Arbitrators union p o s i t i o n s .  i d e n t i f i e d 23 g r i e v o r s as ones h o l d i n g o f f i c i a l O v e r a l l , there was  that employee involvement factor Rather,  Officers  little  evidence to suggest  i n union a f f a i r s was  a motivating  i n the employer's d e c i s i o n to d i s m i s s the worker. i t seemed i n many cases that these g r i e v o r s e i t h e r  became over zealous i n c a r r y i n g out t h e i r union d u t i e s , or were under the impression that as union o f f i c i a l s they were e n t i t l e d to more l i b e r t i e s than the r e s t of the work f o r c e .  Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l Over twenty s p e c i f i c causes  f o r . d i s m i s s a l were  identified  in the awards examined.  Employee o f f e n s e s were then p l a c e d i n t o  one of nine c a t e g o r i e s .  With a sample s i z e of 232 g r i e v o r s a  nine p a r t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  scheme d i d run the r i s k of producing  The number of union members i n the province was estimated from f i g u r e s contained i n the B.C. Labour D i r e c t o r y . A l l union membership f i g u r e s c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s t h e s i s were r e v i s e d to exclude most union members not under the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the B.C. Labour Code. 3  33  numerically  insignificant categories.  course, was  to develop fewer c a t e g o r i e s of a more a l l  encompassing  nature.  The a l t e r n a t i v e , of  The problem with that approach was  given the d i v e r s i f i e d nature of employee misconduct, difficult  that  i t became  to d e f i n e c a t e g o r i e s both wide i n scope and whose  c o n s t i t u e n t elements e x h i b i t e d some common u n i t i n g theme. T h e r e f o r e , the f o l l o w i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  scheme was  adopted:  ( i ) Work Performance. Cases i n c l u d e d here r e l a t e d to how the work was done. Incompetence, n e g l i g e n c e , and f a i l u r e to meet performance standards were the major causes for d i s m i s s a l w i t h i n t h i s c a t e g o r y . The incompetent employee was one whose work was simply beyond h i s / h e r c a p a b i l i t i e s , e i t h e r because of lack of a b i l i t y or as a r e s u l t of some m o t i v a t i o n a l problem. Negligence was the cause when an employee of proven c a p a b i l i t i e s s u f f e r e d from o c c a s i o n a l lapses of a t t e n t i o n or a p p l i c a t i o n which were d e t r i m e n t a l to p r o d u c t i v i t y or the s a f e t y of other employees. ( i i ) Breach of company r u l e s . Examples included smoking i n unauthorized areas, d r i n k i n g a l c o h o l i c beverages d u r i n g lunch hour, e t c . ( i i i ) Damage to company p r o p e r t y . These cases were d i s t i n g u i s h e d from those above i n that they were i s o l a t e d i n s t a n c e s i n the employee's work h i s t o r y . Whether the damage was i n t e n t i o n a l or u n i n t e n t i o n a l was not always c l e a r and no attempt to make that d i s t i n c t i o n was made. ( i v ) Attendance. Included here were i n t e r m i t t e n t absences of one or two days, to absences of many c o n s e c u t i v e days. Also i n c l u d e d i n t h i s category were cases of t a r d i n e s s . (v) U n r e l i a b i l i t y . Under t h i s heading f e l l o f f e n s e s such as s l e e p i n g on the job, l o a f i n g , and extended work breaks. ( v i ) D i s h o n e s t y . T h e f t , f a l s i f i c a t i o n of p r o d u c t i o n or time sheets, and other d i s h o n e s t a c t s were included under t h i s heading. ( v i i ) Insubordination. R e f u s a l s to accept o r d e r s , abusive language, p h y s i c a l a l t e r c a t i o n s with management, p u b l i c c r i t i c i s m s of employers, and other a c t s of i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n were i n c l u d e d under t h i s heading. ( v i i i ) F a i l u r e to get a l o n g . Complaints from f e l l o w workers or from customers of the employer were i n c l u d e d i n t h i s c a t e g o r y . The source of the problem ranged from uncooperativeness to outand-out f i g h t i n g . Included as w e l l were cases of h o r s e p l a y .  34  ( i x ) Other. Included a l c o h o l r e l a t e d d i s m i s s a l s , o f f - t h e - j o b ' misconduct, immoral a c t s , and cases where no p a r t i c u l a r o f f e n s e was a l l e g e d . TABLE 7 Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l RELATIVE CAUSE ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY FOR DISMISSAL FREQUENCY (PERCENT) Performance  46  Breach  18  7.8  Damage  18  7.8  Attendance  36  Unreliability  15  6.5  Dishonesty  15  6.5  Insubordination  50  F a i l u r e to get along  13  5.6  Other  21  9.1  Total  232  of r u l e s  19.8  15.5  21.6  100.0  Table 7 presents the s t a t i s t i c a l p i c t u r e of a l l e g e d for d i s m i s s a l . accounted  causes  Acts of i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n q u i t e expectedly  f o r the l a r g e s t p o r t i o n of d i s m i s s a l s with r e f u s a l s t o  accept orders accounting f o r 24 of the 50 i n s u b o r d i n a t e a c t s . Insubordinate conduct  s t r i k e s at the very heart of the  employment r e l a t i o n s h i p . provokes an emotional  Misconduct  response  q u i c k l y l e a d i n g to d i s m i s s a l .  of t h i s type  likely  i n many managers, a response The prominent p o s i t i o n of  i n s u b o r d i n a t e a c t s can be p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n e d from an employee's p e r s p e c t i v e as w e l l .  Again, the key i s the degree of emotion i n  which i n s u b o r d i n a t e conduct  i s u s u a l l y shrouded.  U n l i k e many  35  TABLE 8 Occupation  by Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l  Count Row Pet. OCCUPATION  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Row Total  Managerial Admin,Prof  5 38.5  1 7.7  0 0.0  1 7.7  1 7.7  1 7.7  2 15.4  1 7.7  1 7.7  13 6.4  Clerical & Sales  9 42.9  1 4.8  0 0.0  1 4.8  1 4.8  4 19.1  2 9.6  1 4.8  2 9.6  21 10.4  Service  6 24.0  7 28.0  1 4.0  1 4.0  0 0.0  3 12.0  2 8.0  2 8.0  3 12.0  25 12.4  Primary  0 0.0  2 15.4  0 0.0  2 15.4  4 30.8  0 0.0  5 38.5  0 0.0  0 0.0  13 6.4  Processing  4 10.8  2 5.4  3 8.1  5 13.5  3 8.1  1 2.7  12 32.4  5 13.5  2 5.4  37 18.3  Machine 5 F a b r i c a t i o n 23.8  0 0.0  4 19.1  4 19.1  2 9.6  1 4.8  3 14.3  1 4.8  1 4.8  21 10.4  Construction  2 15.4  1 7.7  0 0.0  2 15.4  2 15.4  1 7.7  5 38.5  0 0.0  0 0.0  13 6.4  Truck Driving  7 23.3  3 10.0  8 26.7  2 6.7  0 0.0  0 0.0  8 26.7  1 3.4  1 3.4  30 14.9  Materials Handling  3 10.3  2 6.9  1 3.4  5 17.2  3 10.3  1 3.4  9 31.0  2 6.9  2 6.9  29 14.4  Column Total  42 18 20.8 8.9  17 8.4  23 15 11.4 7.4  14 6.9  48 13 23.8 6.4  12 5.9  202 100.0  Note: l=Work Performance, 2=Breach of r u l e s , 3=Damage, 4=Attendance, 5 = U n r e l i a b l i t y , 6=Dishonesty, 7=Insubordination, 8=Incompatible, 9=Other forms of misconduct, premeditated. participating unexpectedly  i n s u b o r d i n a t e a c t s are not as a r u l e  The employee who would never c o n s i d e r i n any other type of misbehaviour f i n d h i m s e l f embroiled  might q u i t e  i n a shouting match or other  e m o t i o n a l l y fed o u t b u r s t . An examination  of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between cause f o r  36  d i s m i s s a l and  the g r i e v o r ' s occupation lends some support  hypothesis that the form  in which employee misconduct  i t s e l f , i s a f u n c t i o n of an  i n d i v i d u a l ' s occupation.  shows that white c o l l a r workers tended r e l a t e d to how  t h e i r work was  done.  to be f i r e d  insubordination.  T h i s was  manifests Table 8  f o r reasons  Among blue c o l l a r  the cause of d i s m i s s a l seemed most l i k e l y  to the  employees  to be f o r reasons of  e s p e c i a l l y true f o r the  primary,  p r o c e s s i n g , and m a t e r i a l s h a n d l i n g o c c u p a t i o n s .  The Contained  Employers  i n the sample of awards were 163  o r g a n i z a t i o n s ) who  conducted  t h e i r businesses at  geograpically dispersed locations.  employers  (total  181  Nearly one-half of the  business s i t e s were l o c a t e d i n the Greater Vancouver Regional District.  The  throughout  the p r o v i n c e .  Of the 163 award.  remaining  s i t e s were about evenly  o r g a n i z a t i o n s , 134  distributed  were p a r t i e s to only  one  N i n e t y - e i g h t g r i e v a n c e s c o u l d be t r a c e d to twenty-nine  employers.  The  two  •  l a r g e s t employers i n the sample, the  P r o v i n c i a l Government and MacMillan  B l o e d e l , generated  a total  of nineteen d i s m i s s a l s . What f o l l o w s i s a d i s c u s s i o n of the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the employers'  industrial  o p e r a t i o n s and a d e s c r i p t i o n of  the labour f o r c e s i z e of the o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n v o l v e d .  I n d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the Employers The  i n d u s t r i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the g r i e v o r s and  the  37  employers f o r whom they worked i s presented f i g u r e s contained there provided  initial  i n t a b l e 9.  support  The  f o r the  hypothesis t h a t : An uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i s m i s s a l s e x i s t s amongst industries. The mining  i n d u s t r y , f o r example, produced 9.1  g r i e v o r s and yet l e s s than  3 percent  percent of the  of the u n i o n i z e d  labour  f o r c e was,  d u r i n g the p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s , employed by the  industry.  On  percent  mining  the other hand, the s e r v i c e s e c t o r generated  25.2  of the g r i e v o r s , but employed c l o s e to 35 percent of  u n i o n i z e d labour  the  force.  Before commencing a more r i g o r o u s t e s t of the above h y p o t h e s i s , a word of warning i s i n order. proceed  The  analysis will  under the assumption t h a t , across i n d u s t r i e s , a constant  p r o p o r t i o n of a l l d i s c h a r g e grievances are taken  to a r b i t r a t i o n .  Because the t o t a l number of d i s m i s s a l s r e p r e s e n t s a f i g u r e of unknown magnitude, the accuracy tested.  of that assumption cannot  However, a f t e r reading of the circumstances  the d i s m i s s a l of over  200  be a reasonable  I t simply  one.  the merits of any  There are, of course,  are t y p i c a l l y one employer w i l l , relocation.  surrounding  employees, I b e l i e v e the assumption to i m p l i e s that a l l unions  given d i s c h a r g e  assumption i s not l i k e l y  be  evaluate  i n a comparable manner.  some good examples when the above  to be s a t i s f i e d .  employer towns.  Mining  communities  Workers d i s m i s s e d by that  i f they d e s i r e s i m i l a r employment, be faced with  C o n s t r u c t i o n workers, on the other hand, change  jobs o f t e n , e i t h e r on t h e i r own  initiative,  or because  c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s are at times short-term and moves must be made to the next c o n s t r u c t i o n s i t e .  To c o n s t r u c t i o n workers a  38  TABLE 9 I n d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Employers and G r i e v o r s EMPLOYERS  INDUSTRY Primary logging mining  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  GRIEVORS  RELATIVE FREQUENCY ABSOLUTE (PERCENT) FREQUENCY  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  23 12 11  12.8 6.7 6.1  39 18 21  16.9 7.8 9.1  9  5.0  13  5.7  Manufacturing food and bev. wood printing metals machining mi sc.  61 12 31 3 2 4 9  34.0 6.7 17.3 1.7 1.1 2.2 5.0  78 14 37 4 8 6 9  33.9 6.1 16.1 1.7 3.5 2.6 3:9  Transportat ion, Comm., & U t i l . transportation comm., & u t i l .  16 13 3  9.0 7.3 1.7  21 17 4  9.1 7.4 1.7  Trade  19  10.6  21  9.1  Service educat ion health other municipal provinc i a l  51 6 5 22 10 8  28.6 3.4 2.8 12.3 5.6 4.5  58 6 6 27 10 9  25.2 2.6 2.6 11.7 4.3 3.9  Construction  Total  179  100.0  230  100.0  d i s m i s s a l may a c c e l e r a t e by only a few days the n e c e s s i t y to relocate.  I t i s u n l i k e l y that the unions to which the miner and  c o n s t r u c t i o n worker belonged would assess member's grievance  the merits of t h e i r  i n comparable f a s h i o n given  the v a r y i n g  degree of impact the d i s m i s s a l would impose on each worker. Examples such as these are b e l i e v e d , however, to be i n the minority.  39  To t e s t  the hypothesis the observed  a r b i t r a t i o n s f o r each i n d u s t r y was  number of d i s c h a r g e  compared  (where data were  a v a i l a b l e ) to the number of d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s that the industry  i n question would have been expected  to produce.  Total  union membership i n an  i n d u s t r y formed the b a s i s f o r c a l c u l a t i n g  the number of expected  discharge  The  data  arbitrations.  i n t a b l e 10 supports  the h y p o t h e s i s .  appear to be discharge prone i n d u s t r i e s . variations  4  The  There do  observed  i n discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s c o u l d not be a t t r i b u t e d to  a chance occurrence  (Chi-square=81.51, df=5, p<.001).  Column three of t a b l e 10 c o n t a i n s the r a t i o of observed expected  discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s .  many times  the observed  number expected. 3.8  The  f i g u r e s there i n d i c a t e  to how  d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s exceeded the  The mining  i n d u s t r y , f o r example,  experienced  times more discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s than what union  f i g u r e s f o r that i n d u s t r y would have suggested.  membership  Finally,  the  f i g u r e s i n column three were used t o rank i n d u s t r i e s a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r d i s c h a r g e proneness. identified.  The  Four d i s t i n c t i v e c a t e g o r i e s were  i n d u s t r i e s of mining  and  trade were by a l a r g e  margin the most discharge prone of the i n d u s t r i e s .  Workers i n  the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y appeared to be the l e a s t prone to dismissal.  The  between the two The  key  remaining  industries f e l l  c l o s e together,  above extremes.  to e x p l a i n i n g the p a t t e r n that emerged was  thought  F o r i n s t a n c e , 34.9 percent of the u n i o n i z e d labour f o r c e was employed i n the s e r v i c e s e c t o r . T h e r e f o r e , of the 212 d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s accounted f o r i n t a b l e 10, 34.9 percent of these ( i . e . 74.0 d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s ) would have been expected to a r i s e i n the s e r v i c e s e c t o r . 4  40  TABLE 10 Discharge A r b i t r a t i o n P r o p e n s i t i e s by Industry OBSERVED EXPECTED RATIO: DISCHARGE DISCHARGE OBSERVEDARBITRATIONS ARBITRATIONS EXPECTED RANKING  INDUSTRY Mining  21  5.5  3.8  Trade  21  8.1  2.6  Manufacturing food and bev wood metals machine misc.  78 14 37 8 6 9  66.6 11.4 33.3 8.5 5.9 7.4  1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.2  Tran,Comm,Util. trans. comm., u t i 1 .  21 17 5  26.3 19.9 6.4  0.8 0.9 0.6  Service education munic i p a l misc.  58 6 10 14  74.0 7.2 11.0 55.8  0.8 0.8 0.9 0.3  Construct ion  13  31.4  0.4  to be found i n examining industries involved.  HIGH  MEDIUM  MEDIUM-LOW  LOW  the o c c u p a t i o n a l make-up of the  Just as some o c c u p a t i o n a l groups seemed  more i n c l i n e d than others t o be d i s m i s s e d f o r s p e c i f i c misconduct, likely  types of  so too i t was thought that c e r t a i n occupations were  t o be d i s c h a r g e prone.  I n d u s t r i e s comprised  l a r g e l y of  these o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s would then be the most d i s c h a r g e prone. Some evidence has a l r e a d y been p r o v i d e d which suggests that a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e number of d i s m i s s a l s came from the ranks of c e r t a i n occupations. a group.  Truck d r i v e r s were were q u i t e c l e a r l y  such  Truck d r i v e r s accounted f o r c l o s e t o 15 percent of the  41  g r i e v o r sample (see t a b l e 3 ) . T h i s would appear t o be a greater percentage  of the sample than what union membership f i g u r e s f o r  t h i s group would suggest.  The non-existence  f i g u r e s by occupation prevented  membership  the ranking of occupations  a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r d i s c h a r g e proneness. ranking schedule  of union  The e x i s t e n c e of such a  c o u l d , however, be e x p l a i n e d i n t h e o r e t i c a l  terms. There were thought  to be three f e a t u r e s of o c c u p a t i o n a l  groups, which c o u l d e x p l a i n the uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i s m i s s a l s a c r o s s i n d u s t r i e s ; d i f f e r e n c e s i n the behavioural, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of employees a c r o s s occupations,  employer  p e r c e p t i o n s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l value of employees i n different skills.  occupations, and the t r a n s f e r a b i l t y of an employee's Each of these w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t u r n .  B e h a v i o u r a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Work Force In t h e i r  study on s t r i k e p r o p e n s i t i e s , Kerr and S i e g e l  r e v e a l e d that an uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of s t r i k e s e x i s t e d among industries.  5  The authors  r e l i e d h e a v i l y on two aspects of the  " i n d u s t r i a l environment" t o e x p l a i n the v a r i a t i o n  in strike  p r o p e n s i t i e s ; these were the l o c a t i o n of the worker i n s o c i e t y and the c h a r a c t e r of the job and the worker. latter  R e f e r r i n g to the  i s s u e , the authors had t h i s to say:  ...the inherent nature of the job determines, s e l e c t i o n and c o n d i t i o n i n g , the kinds of workers  by  'Clark Kerr and Abraham S i e g e l , "The I n t e r i n d u s t r y Propensity to S t r i k e — A n I n t e r n a t i o n a l Comparison," i n I n d u s t r i a l C o n f l i c t , ed. A. Kornhauser R. Dubin, and A. Ross (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954) pp. 189-204.  42  employed and t h e i r a t t i t u d e s , and these workers, i n t u r n , cause c o n f l i c t or peace. If the job i s p h y s i c a l l y d i f f i c u l t and unpleasant, u n s k i l l e d or s e m i s k i l l e d , and c a s u a l or seasonal, and f o s t e r s an independent s p i r i t (as i n the logger in the woods), i t . w i l l draw tough, i n c o n s t a n t , combative, and v i r i l e workers, and they w i l l be i n c l i n e d to s t r i k e . If the job i s p h y s i c a l l y easy and performed in pleasant surroundings, s k i l l e d and r e s p o n s i b l e , steady, and subject to set r u l e s and c l o s e s u p e r v i s i o n , i t w i l l a t t r a c t women or the more submissive type of man who w i l l abhor s t r i k e s . C e r t a i n l y the b u l l of the woods and the mousy bank c l e r k are d i f f e r e n t types of people and can be expected to act d i f f e r e n t l y . ' The  i n f e r e n c e s Kerr and  behavioural  S i e g e l made concerning  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of o c c u p a t i o n a l  a c t i v i t y appear e q u a l l y supportive disproportionalities industries.  groups and  strike  suggested  in d i s m i s s a l r a t e s amongst occupations  Employee behaviour cannot be assumed to be  across occupational i n d i v i d u a l s who others  of the  the  lines.  Some occupations  by t h e i r very nature w i l l  the boundaries of acceptable  constant  w i l l appeal to  be more l i k e l y  to behave in a manner unacceptable to management  outside  and  than and  behaviour as o u t l i n e d i n  a r b i t r a t i o n awards.  Employer A t t i t u d e s There appears to be some supporting that an employee's value  evidence f o r the  to an o r g a n i z a t i o n or a department  thereof,  influences d i s c i p l i n a r y decisions.  analyzed  the a t t i t u d e s of s u p e r v i s o r s towards the  of d i s c i p l i n e and  ' I b i d . p.  belief  found that a worker's value  William  Boise  7  administration  to h i s / h e r  195.  'William B. Boise, " S u p e r v i s o r s ' A t t i t u d e s Toward D i s c i p l i n a r y A c t i o n s , " Personnel A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 28 (1965), 24-27.  department  influenced  the  supervisor's  specifically,  supervisors  penalty  employee whose s k i l l s  on  an  Those  f i n d i n g s have  experimental  study  of  toward  rule  were shown t o be  received  more s e v e r e l y  than m a n a g e r i a l  violations. creative  for rule  Transferability  of  skills  are  general  that  dismissal  will  rules  be  therefore  the be  high  In  an  greater  status  job  significantly  and  disciplined  identical  high  dismissal.  or  may  To  rule  status  or  less  lessen  l e s s severe.  workplace.  exist  A l l things  demand  skills with  likelihood  correspondingly  increased.  of  are  consequences being  so  of  equal,  dismissal  for  many  employees t o c o n f o r m  The  the  e m p l o y e e s whose  because t h e i r  i n d u s t r i e s , the  l e s s i n c e n t i v e for these  of  for  job o p p o r t u n i t i e s  i n a v a r i e t y of be  by  t r a n s f e r a b l e , e i t h e r because h i g h  employers  will  with  e x i s t s elsewhere,  in nature  to e x h i b i t  of a worker's s k i l l s  usually associated  skills  supply.  Skills  impact  these  impose  infractions.  transferabilty  easily  as  More  disciplinary  J a n i t o r s were  personnel  t a l e n t s were p e r c e i v e d  The  8  In a d d i t i o n , e m p l o y e e s w i t h  responsible  r e l u c t a n t to  i n f r a c t i o n s committed  t a l e n t e d employees.  penalty.  a d d i t i o n a l support.  were d i s c o v e r e d  exceptionally  of  were i n s h o r t  factors influencing  judgement, a d m i n i s t r a t o r s leniency  choice  to  there the  may  "Benson Rosen and Thomas H. J e r d e e , " F a c t o r s I n f l u e n c i n g D i s c i p l i n a r y Judgments," J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d P s y c h o l o g y , 59 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , 327-331.  44  Explanatory Of  Power  the three arguments proposed, Kerr and  to provide  the most i n s i g h t i n t o why  groups and  i n d u s t r i e s are discharge  the  prone.  It i s , a f t e r a l l ,  or her  The  s k i l l s are  make continued  in short supply  cannot in and  non-conformity a more r i s k  employee's e v a l u a t i o n the extent  be c o n s i d e r e d  This  It may,  of i t s e l f  free adventure.  An  skills  i n f l u e n c e behaviour must then  to be of secondary importance. of an employee's value  So too must to the  organization.  i s a f a c t o r which r e c e i v e s a t t e n t i o n only a f t e r employee  misconduct has manifested i t s e l f .  Kerr and  Siegel's hypothesis  seems to adequately e x p l a i n the p o s i t i o n of the mining service industries.  It i s noteworthy as w e l l that  and  the  manufacturing i n d u s t r y  i n t h i s study, as w e l l as that of  and  the d i s t r i b u t i o n of  S i e g e l ' s , centered  prone i n d u s t r i e s . has  be  however,  of the t r a n s f e r a b i l i t y of h i s / h e r  to which t h i s may  employer p e r c e p t i o n s  of events  fact that an employee i s aware that  expected to induce unacceptable behaviour.  and  occupational  i n d i v i d u a l ' s behaviour which t r i g g e r s the chain  l e a d i n g to d i s m i s s a l . his  specific  S i e g e l ' s appears  The  low  ranking  Kerr  discharge/strike  of the c o n s t r u c t i o n  industry  been a t t r i b u t e d to the unique employer-employee r e l a t i o n s h i p  found to e x i s t in that  industry.  The  f a c t that a good many of  the employees in the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , .communication, utilities  i n d u s t r i e s come under the  Labour Code, and  thus o u t s i d e  and  j u r i s d i c t i o n of the Canada  the scope of t h i s p r o j e c t ,  have d i s t o r t e d ( i n an unknown d i r e c t i o n ) the d i s c h a r g e of that  i n d u s t r i a l category.  Trade remained one  category whose v i s i b l y high discharge  ranking  may  ranking  industrial  came as somewhat  45  of a s u r p r i s e .  I t appears that the t r a n s f e r a b i I t y of the s k i l l s  possessed by those employed in t h i s i n d u s t r y best e x p l a i n s the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y high number of d i s c h a r g e s two-thirds  that arose.  of the g r i e v o r s who were employed i n t h i s  held c l e r i c a l ,  s a l e s , or general  are occupations  labour  About  industry  type p o s i t i o n s . -These  whose m a r k e t a b i l i t y i s i n c r e a s e d because of the  vast number of p o t e n t i a l employers.  Number of Employees i n the D i s m i s s i n g  Organization  Data on the number of employees i n the d i s m i s s i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s were a v a i l a b l e f o r 113 of the 163 employers (see t a b l e 11). few  The sample was dominated by employers of r e l a t i v e l y  employees.  Close  to one-quarter of the o r g a n i z a t i o n s  employed a work f o r c e of l e s s than f i f t y workers. percent  Nearly  60  of the o r g a n i z a t i o n s employed no more than 500  employees.' The very  d i s t r i b u t i o n of g r i e v o r s was h e a v i l y weighted among  small and very  large organizations.  About 30 percent of  the d i s m i s s a l s o r i g i n a t e d i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s of fewer than 200 employees.  A s i m i l a r percentage of d i s m i s s a l s arose i n  o r g a n i z a t i o n s of 2000 or more employees. The  numerical  sample should likely  s i g n i f i c a n c e of small o r g a n i z a t i o n s  not be taken l i g h t l y .  in this  These employers are not  to possess a great deal of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s  'This i s not to suggest that a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e number of d i s m i s s a l s arose i n firms of r e l a t i v e l y few employees. Lack of data prevents that hypothesis from being t e s t e d . In any event, the number of employers contained i n that category i s thought to be an important o b s e r v a t i o n i n and of i t s e l f .  46  TABLE 11 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Employers and G r i e v o r s by T o t a l O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment EMPLOYERS  GRIEVORS  TOTAL ORGANIZATIONAL EMPLOYMENT  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  0-50  27  23.9  27  15.4  51-100  11  9.7  14  8.0  101-200  13  11.5  13  7.4  201-300  16  14.2  20  11.4  301-500  8  7.1  14  8.0  501-750  2  1.8  9  5.1  751-1000  1  1.0  1  0.6  1001-1500  11  9.7  18  10.3  1501-2000  4  3.5  5  2.9  2001-5000  6  5.3  11  6.3  5001-10000  6  5.3  10  5.7  8  7.1  33  18.9  113  100.0  175  100.0  10000+ Total  expertise.  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  Unless they have been i n v o l v e d i n a r b i t r a t i o n s at  some p r e v i o u s time, they may very w e l l be unaware of t h e i r responsibilities criteria  i n the area of employee d i s c i p l i n e , and of the  a r b i t r a t o r s use i n e v a l u a t i n g contested  While these employers are most l i k e l y to i n s u r e e f f i c i e n c y retailing, relations  legal  grievances.  to r e l y on p r o f e s s i o n a l s  i n areas of p r o d u c t i o n , f i n a n c i n g , and  the a i d of s i m i l a r e x p e r t i s e i n the f i e l d of labour i s not apt to be sought u n t i l a c r i s i s has a r i s e n —  47  a f t e r a d i s m i s s a l has occurred and been taken the  to a r b i t r a t i o n by  union.  The  Arbitrators  A t o t a l of f i f t y - e i g h t a r b i t r a t o r s awards s a m p l e d .  10  acted as chairmen i n the  The ten most f r e q u e n t l y demanded  were i n v o l v e d i n the settlement of 68 percent O n e - t h i r d of the d i s p u t e s were c h a i r e d by j u s t arbitrators. 17.6  One a r b i t r a t o r alone  percent of the awards.  the a r b i t r a t o r s  participated  arbitrators  of the g r i e v a n c e s . three  served as the chairman i n  At the other extreme, 60 percent of i n j u s t one a r b i t r a t i o n  hearing  each. The  parties  to the d i s p u t e s showed no c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e  regard to the composition boards p r e s i d e d over proceedings,  of a r b i t r a t i o n boards.  with  S i n g l e member  52.8 percent of the a r b i t r a t i o n  with multi-member boards p r e f e r r e d by 47.2 percent  of the p a r t i e s . Finally, dissenting  i n 46 of the 102 t r i p a r t i t e boards,  at l e a s t one  view was expressed.  Elapsed Time A n a l y s i s The  purpose of t h i s e x e r c i s e was to determine the impact  that multi-member, as opposed to s i n g l e member boards of a r b i t r a t i o n had on the time Total  1 0  r e q u i r e d to s e t t l e g r i e v a n c e s .  elapsed time, the time which elapsed between the date of  S e e Appendix 3 f o r a l i s t  of the a r b i t r a t o r s .  48  d i s c h a r g e and the date of the a r b i t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n ,  was  separated i n t o i t s two c o n s t i t u e n t elements: the time between the  date of d i s c h a r g e and the date of the a r b i t r a t i o n h e a r i n g ,  and the time taken f o l l o w i n g the hearings f o r the board to issue a decision.  The three time p e r i o d s were then c a l c u l a t e d f o r  both s i n g l e and multi-member boards of a r b i t r a t i o n . The r e s u l t s of the a n a l y s i s are c o n t a i n e d i n t a b l e 12.  The  f i g u r e s show that the numerical composition of an . a r b i t r a t i o n board i n f l u e n c e d  i n no u n c e r t a i n manner t o t a l e l a p s e d time and  i t s two component p a r t s .  The e l a p s e d time between an  a r b i t r a t i o n h e a r i n g and a board's d e c i s i o n comes under  the c o n t r o l of an a r b i t r a t i o n board.  t r i p a r t i t e boards r e q u i r e d a s i g n i f i c a n t l y to  i s one which  As expected,  longer p e r i o d of time  issue a d e c i s i o n than d i d s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s  Sole a r b i t r a t o r s r e q u i r e d an average of 15.9 hearing to p r o v i d e a d e c i s i o n .  clearly  (t=2.234, p<.001). days f o l l o w i n g a  Multi-member boards took n e a r l y  one week longer on average to issue an award. The e l a p s e d time between the date of d i s m i s s a l and the date of  the a r b i t r a t i o n h e a r i n g i s determined more by the  of  the p a r t i e s ' grievance procedure.  that elapsed here was  N e v e r t h e l e s s , the time  an average of ten days longer when the  board's composition was  of the multi-member v a r i e t y .  only conclude that t h i s d i f f e r e n c e the  mechanics  One  i s a d i r e c t consequence  can of  time r e q u i r e d to appoint p a r t i s a n advocates and of the  difficulties  i n s c h e d u l i n g a h e a r i n g f o r not one, but three or  more board members. In  terms of t o t a l e l a p s e d time then, a s i g n i f i c a n t  d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t e d between the e f f i c i e n c y of s o l e  arbitrators  49  TABLE 12 Elapsed Time P a t t e r n s i n Discharge A r b i t r a t i o n s by Board Composition  BOARD COMPOSITION  GRIEVANCE TO HEARING  HEARING TO AWARD  TOTAL ELAPSED TIME  Sole Arbi trator  X=103.3 S=69.8 n = 96  X=15.9 S=15.1 n = 96  1=131.2 S=80.2 n = 110  Tripartite Board  2=113.5 s=64.7 n = 78  X=22.2 s=20.6 n=78  5=147.1 s=88.3 n = 95  and panels of a r b i t r a t o r s  (t=2.31, p<.05).  T o t a l elapsed time  was  on average s i x t e e n days longer when a panel of a r b i t r a t o r s  was  used by the p a r t i e s . The  r e s u l t s d e s c r i b e d above compare favourably  f i n d i n g s i n other for  jurisdictions.  with  A recent O n t a r i o study  i n s t a n c e , that s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s  found,  i n that p r o v i n c e took an  average of 23 days from the date of the hearing t o the date of the award, s i x days longer than Columbia.  11  sole a r b i t r a t o r s i n B r i t i s h  Furthermore, t r i p a r t i t e boards i n O n t a r i o took 23  days longer t o issue awards than d i d s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s i n that p r o v i n c e and about 24 days longer than multi-member boards i n British  Columbia.  F i n a l l y , a comparison of elapsed time p a t t e r n s i n B r i t i s h Columbia t o those  i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s r e v e a l s a . s t r i k i n g  " S t u d y Finds S i n g l e A r b i t r a t o r Is F a s t e r and Cheaper," CCH I n d u s t r i a l and Personnel Developments, No. 47, November 20, 1974. 11  50  contrast  i n the e f f i c i e n c y of the two systems.  In a study  c o v e r i n g the years 1971-1972, r e s e a r c h e r s i n the United States found  that the average elapsed time  date of award was 255 d a y s . Columbia was 139 days.  1 2  from date of grievance to  The comparable f i g u r e f o r B r i t i s h  The p a r t i e s to the d i s p u t e r e q u i r e d an  average of 219 days to move a grievance to the h e a r i n g stage i n the United S t a t e s . days on average.  The p a r t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia r e q u i r e d 108 A r b i t r a t o r s i n B r i t i s h Columbia took an  average of 19 days f o l l o w i n g the hearings to p r o v i d e an award. T h e i r United States c o u n t e r p a r t s needed more than  four  times  that l e n g t h of time, 81 days on average.  Summary The purpose of t h i s chapter was to put i n t o  statistical  p e r s p e c t i v e the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i e s i n v o l v e d i n the d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n process.  Although  some q u e s t i o n s were  answered i n the course of that a n a l y s i s (e.g. the elapsed  time  d i f f e r e n c e s between s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s and t r i p a r t i t e boards of a r b i t r a t i o n ) , the s t r e n g t h of the a n a l y s i s i s not b e l i e v e d to lie  in i t s a b i l i t y  to answer q u e s t i o n s .  Rather,  the importance  of the a n a l y s i s i s that i t confirms what were p r e v i o u s l y u n s u b s t a t i a t e d s u s p i c i o n s (e.g. that the g r i e v o r s d i d i n f a c t have few years s e n i o r i t y , or that the vast m a j o r i t y came from the ranks of blue c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n s ) . c o n t r i b u t i o n of the chapter  Thus, the major  i s that i t p r o v i d e s a foundation  P e a r c e Davis and Gopal C. P a t i , "Elapsed Time P a t t e r n s i n Labor Grievance A r b i t r a t i o n : 1942-1972," The A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 29, (1974), 15-27. 1 2  51  upon which q u e s t i o n s can now pursued.  be asked and more r i g o r o u s analyses  52  CHAPTER V AN ANALYSIS OF THE ARBITRAL DISPOSITION OF DISCHARGE ARBITRATIONS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA T h i s chapter w i l l British  Columbia  d i s c h a r g e was partial,  examine the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s in  i n terms of t h e i r outcomes: that  upheld, or whether reinstatement with f u l l ,  or no back pay was  purposes of comparison,  awarded by the a r b i t r a t o r .  r e s u l t s of t h i s study w i l l  will  1  i n North  America.  then be presented and an  attempt  be made to e x p l a i n the p a t t e r n of outcomes found to e x i s t  in B r i t i s h  Columbia.  Comparative Fred H o l l y , i n the f i r s t arbitrations,  reviewed 1055  Analysis  major a n a l y s i s of d i s c h a r g e  awards of American  c o v e r i n g the years 1942-1956.  2  The  arbitrators  r e s u l t s of h i s study were  presented f o r two time p e r i o d s : 1942-1947 and 1951-1956. the  For the  the chapter begins with a review of  r e s u l t s obtained i n other s t u d i e s conducted The  i s , whether a  first  p e r i o d management's d e c i s i o n to d i s c h a r g e was  During upheld  A w a r d s which c o u l d not be p l a c e d i n t o one of these four c a t e g o r i e s were excluded from the a n a l y s i s . There were ten such exclusions. J . Fred H o l l y , " C o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n Discharge Cases," Labor Review, 80 (1957), 684-688. 2  Monthly  53  in 39.5  percent of the cases and m o d i f i e d or reversed  percent of the time.  The  a c t i o n s s u s t a i n e d in 45.4 reduced  i n 54.6  p e r i o d 1951-1956 saw  revoked  or  percent of the cases. f o r what he saw  improvement i n management's r e c o r d with time. f a m i l i a r i t y with the a r b i t r a t i o n process The  management's  percent of the awards and  H o l l y o f f e r e d s e v e r a l reasons  arguments.  61.5  An i n c r e a s i n g  formed the b a s i s of h i s  use of a r b i t r a t i o n as the f i n a l  grievance procedures As the acceptance  was  as an  not widely used p r i o r  step i n to World War  II.  of grievance a r b i t r a t i o n grew, the p a r t i e s to  d i s p u t e s gained a b e t t e r understanding  of the c r i t e r i a  a r b i t r a t o r s , which in turn l e d to b e t t e r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of d i s c i p l i n e .  used by  managerial  In a d d i t i o n , i t was  b e l i e v e d that  a r b i t r a t o r s were g a i n i n g experience and becoming more c o n s i s t e n t in c o n s i d e r i n g c e r t a i n accepted p r i n c i p l e s with respect to each of the v a r i o u s types of d i s c h a r g e  cases.  John Teele r e p l i c a t e d H o l l y ' s study using a sample of American awards that spanned the years 1956-1960.  3  f a i l e d to d i s c l o s e any  significant dissimilarities  from those H o l l y found  f o r the p e r i o d 1951-1956.  that management was  the c a s e s .  The a n a l y s i s i n outcomes Teele  found  s u s t a i n e d i n 44 percent of the d i s m i s s a l s .  The d i s c h a r g e penalty was reinstatement  with f u l l  reduced  32 percent of the time  back pay was  ordered  and  i n 24 percent  of  Teele s p e c u l a t e d that the "improvement" spoken of by  H o l l y might not climb beyond some l i m i t .  He  44 percent  have represented  success rate- of management may  suggested  that the  John W. T e e l e , "The Thought Process of the A r b i t r a t o r , " A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 17 (1965), 85-95. 3  295  the  The  54  area of  stabilization.  D a l l a s Jones analyzed  665 a r b i t r a t i o n awards i n v o l v i n g  d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s f o r the years 1963-1967 and h i s f i n d i n g s appeared to lend support r e p o r t e d t h a t : 46.2  to T e e l e ' s h y p o t h e s i s .  percent  4  The  study  of the d i s m i s s a l s were upheld,  percent of the awards ordered reinstatement  with f u l l  15.6  back  pay,  12.3  percent of the g r i e v o r s were r e i n s t a t e d with p a r t i a l back  pay,  and  reinstatement  percent of the cases. management was  with no back pay was  decided  fully  percent  resulted  25.9  From these r e s u l t s Jones concluded  more c a r e f u l  went to a r b i t r a t i o n .  awarded i n  Not  that  i n s c r e e n i n g those d i s m i s s a l s which  only were 46 percent of the  i n managements's favour, but i n reinstatement  group of cases, s t a t e d Jones,  cases  in a d d i t i o n ,  with no back pay.  25.9  The  latter  c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d b o r d e r l i n e  management v i c t o r i e s . In a more recent American study, Ken Wolter  r e p o r t e d that 42.3  awards i s s u e d between 1971 disciplinary action. the awards and authors noted  reduced  percent of 400 and  1974  One  discharge  D i s m i s s a l s were revoked i n 34.7  and  Roger  arbitration  upheld management's i n 23 percent of  percent of the c a s e s .  5  The  that when these f i n d i n g s were compared to those of  H o l l y there appeared to be a r e v e r s a l trend.  Jennings  i n the  "improvement"  e x p l a n a t i o n provided f o r t h i s turn of events  was  D a l l a s L. Jones, " R a m i f i c a t i o n s of Back-Pay Awards i n Suspension and Discharge Cases," i n A r b i t r a t i o n and S o c i a l Change. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting, N a t i o n a l Academy of A r b i t r a t o r s , G e r a l d G. Somers, ed. (Washington: BNA Books, 1969), pp. 163-175. 4  Ken Jennings and Roger Wolter, "Discharge Cases Reconsidered," The A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 31 (1976), 164-180. 5  55  that unions had with time become more s o p h i s t i c a t e d  in s c r e e n i n g  those g r i e v a n c e s allowed to proceed to a r b i t r a t i o n .  Unions, i t  was  suggested,  may  have learned not to ..press those  g e n e r a l l y disapproved by The  first  grievances  arbitrators.  Canadian study s i m i l a r  i n design to those  d i s c u s s e d above, drew on a sample of 645 d i s c i p l i n a r y  discharges  f i l e d with the O n t a r i o Labour-Management Commission between J u l y 1970  and December 1974.' The  same p a t t e r n of outcomes that had  emerged i n the American s t u d i e s was  once again e v i d e n t .  Management's discharge a c t i o n s were upheld cases.  The d i s c h a r g e p e n a l t y was  awards, and a l e s s e r p e n a l t y was  revoked  i n 46 percent of the i n 17 percent of the  substituted  in 35 percent of  the d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s . R e f l e c t i n g f o r a moment on the s t u d i e s thus f a r d i s c u s s e d one has to be impressed  with the u n i f o r m i t y of r e s u l t s  t a b l e 13).  here are f i v e major s t u d i e s .  Represented  of over t h i r t y years has been evenly canvassed. however, appear to be independent  The  (see A period  results,  of the researcher and of time.  Within any given outcome category the range i n r e s u l t s obtained v a r i e s by only a few percentage points.'' When one examines the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s i n B r i t i s h Columbia d u r i n g the p e r i o d 1974-1977, however, a p a t t e r n of  'George W. Adams, "Concepts of I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e and T h e i r R e s u l t s , " paper presented at the I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s Centre, Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , Kingston, Ontario,12 May 1978. Not a l l of the authors presented t h e i r f i n d i n g s in the form presented i n t a b l e 13. In a few s t u d i e s separate f i g u r e s were given f o r each of the two types of reduced p e n a l t i e s ( i . e . f o r reinstatement with p a r t i a l and no back pay). For ease in c o m p a r a b i l i t y , only three outcome c a t e g o r i e s were used i n t a b l e 13. 7  56  TABLE 13 Comparative R e s u l t s of Discharge A r b i t r a t i o n Outcomes  PERCENTAGE OF CASES IN WHICH:  HOLLY (n=1055)  TEELE . JONES (n=295) (n=665)  JENNINGS & WOLTER ADAMS (n=400) (n=645)  19421951  19511956  19561960  19631967  19711974  19701974  MANAGEMENT SUSTAINED  39.4  45.4  44.0  46.2  42.3  46.5  PENALTY REVOKED  26.2  22.2  24.0  15.6  23.0  17.8  PENALTY REDUCED  34.4  32.4  32.0  38.2  34.7  . 35.7  TABLE 14 A r b i t r a l D i s p o s i t i o n of Discharge G r i e v a n c e s : B r i t i s h Columbia 1974-1977  ARBITRATORS' AWARDS  ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY  RELATIVE FREQUENCY (PERCENT)  MANAGEMENT SUSTAINED  70  31.5  PENALTY REVOKED  47  21.2  PENALTY REDUCED  105  47.3  Total  222  outcomes very d i f f e r e n t  100.0  than those d i s c u s s e d above u n f o l d s ,  d i s c h a r g e penalty was upheld in only 31.5 percent of the arbitrations.  Reinstatement with no back pay was awarded i n  The  57  24.3 pay  percent of the cases while reinstatement was  ordered  i n 23.0  percent  with p a r t i a l back  of the discharge  arbitrations.  These r e s u l t s are n o t i c e a b l y at odds with f i g u r e s in other j u r i s d i c t i o n s .  On  the whole, a r b i t r a t o r s  Columbia were about 30 percent  likely  p e n a l t y was  the  35 percent more  to be awarded.  Why  d i d such a d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n of outcomes emerge in  B r i t i s h Columbia?  From a p u r e l y methodological  d i f f e r e n c e s i n sampling account  in B r i t i s h  l e s s l i k e l y to uphold  d i s c h a r g e p e n a l t y , while a reduced  obtained  techniques  perspective,  used i n t h i s study  for some of the d i s c r e p a n c y .  may  T h i s study used a sample  of d i s c h a r g e awards which very n e a r l y approached the p o p u l a t i o n of a l l d i s c h a r g e awards i s s u e d d u r i n g the p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s . The  sample of d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s used i n the American  s t u d i e s were, by comparison, drawn only from those awards which were p u b l i s h e d . s t u d i e s may  Thus, the sample of awards used i n those  not have been as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a l l discharge  g r i e v a n c e s submitted study.  to a r b i t r a t i o n as was  Jones suggested,  the case  in t h i s  however, that there i s reason  to  b e l i e v e that i f a l l d i s c h a r g e awards were p u b l i s h e d , the percentage suggested  of d i s c h a r g e s upheld would be g r e a t e r , not l e s s . that many of the cases  He  i n which the d i s c h a r g e penalty  i s upheld are not p u b l i s h e d because they present i s s u e s or circumstances.  8  no  unusual  In the case of the O n t a r i o study, i t  appears that a l l d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s which o c c u r r e d during the p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s were i n c l u d e d i n the sample.  "Jones,  p.165.  Therefore,  58  sampling techniques alone cannot e x p l a i n the markedly set  of outcomes observed i n B r i t i s h  different  Columbia.  Research methods a s i d e , s e v e r a l hypothesis can be developed to  e x p l a i n the B r i t i s h Columbia  results.  Perhaps  unions i n t h i s  province are more d i s c r i m i n a t i n g than unions elsewhere in screening those grievances taken to a r b i t r a t i o n .  It i s  g e n e r a l l y accepted that unions use the a r b i t r a t i o n process f o r political  or s t r a t e g i c  r e a s o n s — t o maintain rank and  morale, to allow the a r b i t r a t o r  file  (and not the union) to make a  negative d e c i s i o n , to support the p o s i t i o n of a steward, as a r e a c t i o n to i n t r a - u n i o n  factional  unions i n B r i t i s h Columbia political of  rivalries,  e t c . ' Perhaps  p l a c e l e s s r e l i a n c e on these kinds of  c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and p l a c e more emphasis on the m e r i t s  each g r i e v a n c e compared to unions i n v o l v e d i n the other  studies. D i f f e r e n c e s i n managerial techniques might the  observed d i f f e r e n c e  i n a r b i t r a l outcomes.  a l s o account f o r The  percentage of upheld d i s c h a r g e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia that employers employers  low may  indicate  i n t h i s p r o v i n c e are l e s s d i s c r i m i n a t i n g than  i n other j u r i s d i c t i o n s  i n d e c i d i n g those g r i e v a n c e s  that should be allowed to proceed to a r b i t r a t i o n . T e s t i n g these hypotheses  i s beyond the scope of t h i s study.  It would be worthwhile to determine the extent to which union and management s c r e e n i n g methods d i f f e r e d  i n B r i t i s h Columbia  opposed  i n t e r e s t i n g to  to O n t a r i o .  I t would be extemely  evaluate the impact that any observed d i f f e r e n c e s had. on the  'See Donald J . Petersen, "Why Unions Go to A r b i t r a t i o n , " P e r s o n n e l , 48, No.4 (1971), 44-49.  as  59  o v e r a l l record of management. making process of employers,  I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of the d e c i s i o n i n f i r i n g employees, and of unions,  in t a k i n g grievances to a r b i t r a t i o n , might  very w e l l o f f e r some  i n s i g h t s i n t o e x p l a i n i n g the d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n of outcomes which emerged i n B r i t i s h  Columbia.  T h i s t h e s i s w i l l not attempt  to e x p l a i n why  the a r b i t r a l  d i s p o s i t i o n of d i s c h a r g e g r i e v a n c e s d i f f e r e d so d r a s t i c a l l y between B r i t i s h Columbia  and other j u r i s d i c t i o n s .  of that v a r i a t i o n must, f o r the types of reasons above, remain a subject  of s p e c u l a t i o n .  The  sources  discussed  What w i l l be  undertaken  i s a i n t r a - B r i t i s h Columbia  a n a l y s i s of the sources of v a r i a t i o n  in a r b i t r a t o r s ' d e c i s i o n s .  In chapter four many of the  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the g r i e v o r s , employers, discussed.  An attempt  w i l l now  and a r b i t r a t o r s were  be made to determine whether any  r e l a t i o n s h i p s e x i s t between the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i e s c o n t a i n e d i n the sample, and the o v e r a l l d e c i s i o n s of arbitrators.  A n a l y s i s of the A r b i t r a l D i s p o s i t i o n of Discharge Grievances i n B r i t i s h Columbia Before commencing, i t i s thought  important to examine the  d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s on a y e a r l y b a s i s .  The p e r i o d under  investigation  One  relatively distort  few d i s m i s s a l s were upheld may  year i n which  have been enough.to  f i g u r e s i n t a b l e 15 suggest that t h i s was  i t was  not the case.  to management's c r e d i t that the percentage of  d i s c h a r g e s revoked during  four years i n l e n g t h .  the o v e r a l l r e s u l t s .  The While  i s only  f e l l quite sharply  over the four year  period,  the same p e r i o d the percentage of d i s m i s s a l s upheld  each  60  TABLE 15 The A r b i t r a l D i s p o s i t i o n of Discharge Grievances i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Year Count Row Pet Col Pet YEAR  year  REINSTATEMENT WITH: DISCHARGE UPHELD  NO BACK PAY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  1974  13 35.1 18.6  . 5 13.5 9.3  8 21.6 15.7  11 29.7 23.4  37 16.7  1975  21 33.3 30.0  10 15.9 18.5  14 22.2 27.5  18 28.6 38.3  63 28.4  1976  22 34.9 31.4  18 28.6 33.3  16 25.4 31.4°  7 14.9 14.9  63 28.4  1977.  14 23.7 20.0  21 35.6 38.9  13 22.0 25.5  11 18.6 23.4  59 26.6  Column Total  70 31.5  54 24.3  51 23.0  47 21.2  222 100.0  fell  in a similar  fashion.  Furthermore, d i s c h a r g e s  s u s t a i n e d never exceeded 36 percent.  Finally,  i t i s noteworthy  t h a t the above o b s e r v a t i o n s imply t h a t over the four year p e r i o d of a n a l y s i s a r b i t r a t o r s s u b s t i t u t e d t h e i r  judgement f o r that of  management's i n an i n c r e a s i n g l y g r e a t e r percentage  Outcome by Employment  of the cases.  Status  There were too few p r o b a t i o n a r y employees i n the sample to have an impact the d i f f e r e n t  on the o v e r a l l set of outcomes. l e g i s l a t i v e c o n d i t i o n s governing  However, given the d i s m i s s a l of  p r o b a t i o n e r s as opposed to o r d i n a r y employees, an examination of  61  a r b i t r a t o r s ' decisons with respect t o these two c l a s s e s of employees seemed a p p r o p r i a t e . As reported  i n t a b l e 16, p r o b a t i o n a r y employees i n B r i t i s h  Columbia had t h e i r d i s m i s s a l s upheld more than twice as o f t e n as TABLE 16 Outcome by Employee Count Row Pet  Status  REINTSTATEMENT WITH:  EMPLOYEE STATUS  DISCHARGE NO BACK PAY UPHELD  REGULAR  63 29.9  PROBATIONARY  7 63.6  Column Total  70 31.5  was the case  54 25.6 0 0.0 54 24.3  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  49 23.2  45 21.3  2 18.2  2 18.2  51 23.0  47 21.2  f o r s e n i o r i t y r a t e d employees.  211 95.1 11 4.9 222 100.0  T h i s stems from the  f a c t that i n three i n s t a n c e s d i s c h a r g e d p r o b a t i o n a r y were covered  Row Total  by c o l l e c t i v e agreements which l e f t  employees  to the  d i s c r e t i o n of the employer the u n f e t t e r e d r i g h t t o d i s m i s s employees d u r i n g t h e i r p r o b a t i o n a r y p e r i o d .  In four a d d i t i o n a l  t  cases  i n v o l v i n g p r o b a t i o n e r s the a r b i t r a t o r s r u l e d that the  standard  t o use was " j u s t cause" but to a l e s s e r degree  that a p p l i e d t o r e g u l a r employees.  than  62  Outcome by S e n i o r i t y Had the sample of g r i e v o r s c o n t a i n e d a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n long  s e r v i c e employees the low percentage of upheld  would have been e a s i e r to e x p l a i n .  of  dismissals  Long s e r v i c e employees have  the most at stake i n d i s c h a r g e cases and a r b i t r a t o r s could  be  expected to be more s e n s i t i v e to the i n t e r e s t s of these employees.  But over 70 percent of the g r i e v o r s had no more than  four years of s e r v i c e .  T h i s s t a t i s t i c would be b e t t e r  e x p l a i n i n g a high percentage of upheld d i s m i s s a l s . no i n s i g h t i n t o e x p l a i n i n g  s u i t e d to  I t provided  the observed outcomes i n B r i t i s h  Columbia. Table 17 examines the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a r b i t r a t o r s ' decisions  i n r e l a t i o n to employee s e n i o r i t y .  The f i g u r e s  suggest that the s e n i o r i t y of a g r i e v o r had l i t t l e  impact on the  TABLE 17 Outcome by S e n i o r i t y Count Row Pet SENIORITY  REINSTATEMENT WITH: DISCHARGE NO UPHELD BACK PAY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  Less than 2 yrs  16 25.8  16 25.8  17 27.4  13 21.0  62 43.7  GT 2 y r s LT 4 y r s  8 21.1  13 34.2  9 23.7  8 21.1  38 26.8  More than 4 yrs  13 31.0  9 21.4  12 28.6  8 19.0  42 29.6  Column Total  37 26.1  38 26.8  38 26.8  29 20.4  142 100.0  a r b i t r a l d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s .  There was l i t t l e  variation in  outcomes between those employees with more than four years of  63  s e n i o r i t y and service.  those employees with l e s s than four year of  Furthermore, the v a r i a t i o n which e x i s t s i s i n a  d i r e c t i o n opposite  to what might have been p r e d i c t e d .  percentage of discharges group of g r i e v o r s .  There are of course a myriad of  regard,  grievance  greater  were upheld among the high s e n i o r i t y  which c o u l d have d i s t o r t e d the s e n i o r i t y and  A  factors  r e l a t i o n s h i p between g r i e v o r  disposition.  I t i s noteworthy i n t h i s  however, that a r b i t r a t o r s seldom made e x p l i c i t  to a g r i e v o r ' s s e n i o r i t y in t h e i r w r i t t e n  reference  decisions.  Outcome by D i s c i p l i n a r y Record Table 18 presents  the d i s t r i b u t i o n of outcomes on the  of the g r i e v o r s ' p r i o r d i s c i p l i n a r y r e c o r d s . some q u e s t i o n contained  concerning  no e x p l i c i t  the  reference  a n a l y s i s was  r e s t r i c t e d to employees who  probationary  period. be no u n c e r t a i n t y A strong  In a d d i t i o n , had  completed  their  and  the d e c i s i o n s  of  (Chi-square=26.19, df=6, p<.001, Gamma=-0.52).  four of t a b l e 18. f o r a g r i e v o r who  The had  i n columns one  l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s m i s s a l being received a d i s c i p l i n a r y penalty  r e l a t e d to the one  times g r e a t e r and  the  relationship clearly exists  source of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s most evident  offense  that  i n i n t e r p r e t i n g the r e s u l t s  between the g r i e v o r s ' work records arbitrators  was  to a g r i e v o r ' s work record,  omitted i n t h i s a n a l y s i s .  p r e s e n t e d i n t a b l e 18.  Because there  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of awards which  category was  There can  basis  f o r an  than that of a g r i e v o r with a c l e a n work had  and  upheld  which produced the d i s m i s s a l was  more than twice as l i k e l y as the g r i e v o r who  The  six  record,  been  64  TABLE 18 Outcome by D i s c i p l i n a r y Record Count Row Pet  REINSTATEMENT WITH :  DISCIPLINARY RECORD  DISCHARGE NO UPHELD BACK PAY  Clean  3 8.1 7  Unrelated Related Column Total disciplined his/her  24.3  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  9  13 35.1  12 32.4  9  12 38.7  9.7  dismissal.  31 27.9  5  43 38.7  29.0  22 51.2  11 25.6  11.6  11.6  32 28.8  29 26.1  30 27.0  20 18.0  f o r misconduct d i s s i m i l a r to that  37 33.3  3.  22.6  5  Row Total  111 100.0  which r e s u l t e d i n  G r i e v o r s with unblemished work records were  a l s o three times more l i k e l y  to be r e i n s t a t e d  with f u l l  back  pay. That the above r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t e d  i s not s u r p r i s i n g .  There would have been r e a l cause f o r alarm had i t not materialized. four  What i s s u r p r i s i n g  so few of the g r i e v o r s  i s that as noted i n chapter  had been subject  d i s c i p l i n e p r i o r to t h e i r d i s m i s s a l . without f i r s t discipline discipline.  To d i s m i s s an employee  attempting t o apply l e s s severe forms of  i s d i r e c t l y at odds with the p r i n c i p l e s of c o r r e c t i v e T h i s o f f e r s one e x p l a n a t i o n f o r the low percentage  of upheld d i s m i s s a l s . A r b i t r a t o r s the  to some form of  have o b v i o u s l y taken note of  f a c t t h a t many employers f a i l e d t o adhere to the p r i n c i p l e s  of c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e .  65  Outcome by Cause f o r d i s m i s s a l There was arbitrators 19).  No  considerable  in r e l a t i o n  real  In f a c t , the  i n s i g h t s i n t o how  employee misconduct. for  to the causes for d i s m i s s a l  a given  a r b i t r a t o r s view s p e c i f i c  q u i t e low  imply that a r b i t r a t o r s consider  to provide  even  types of  That the percentage of d i s m i s s a l s upheld  of a l e s s s e r i o u s nature. failed  table  f i g u r e s in t a b l e 19 do not  type of misconduct was  necessarily  (see  i n s i g h t i n t o e x p l a i n i n g management's record  emerged however. provide  v a r i a t i o n in the d e c i s i o n s of  I t may  convincing  simply  does not that offense  mean that  to  be  employers  evidence in support of the  actions  they took. There are, n e v e r t h e l e s s , with some c e r t a i n t y . were upheld.  O v e r a l l , 31.6  Therefore,  be made  dismissals  incompetence, and  tended to have t h e i r d i s m i s s a l s overturned more forms of a l l e g e d  Those workers charged with  insubordination,  or a breach of company r u l e s were l e s s l i k e l y  t h e i r d i s m i s s a l overturned than was The  of the  f o r other  unreliability, see  percent  absenteeism, dishonesty,  o f t e n than g r i e v o r s dismissed misconduct.  statements that can  employees accused of  damage to company property, incompatibility  a few  charges of incompetence and  the sample as a whole.  dishonesty  are  generally  regarded as ones, which to be s u b s t a n t i a t e d ,  r e q u i r e a high  degree of p r o o f .  dismissals  sustained  Although the percentage of  in cases of incompetence was  not a p p r e c i a b l y d i f f e r e n t  from that of the sample as a whole, i t should 40 percent  to  of these g r i e v o r s were returned  be noted that over  to work with  full  66  TABLE 19 Outcome by Cause f o r D i s m i s s a l Count Row Pet Col Pet  REINSTATEMENT WITH:  CAUSE FOR DISMISSAL  DISCHARGE NO UPHELD BACK PAY  Work Performance  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  13 31.0 19.1  7 16.7 13.2  5 11.9 9.8  17 40.5 39.5  42 19.5  Breach of r u l e s  9 50.0 13.2  4 22.2 7.5  5 27.8 9.8  0 0.0 0.0  18 8.4  Damage  3 17.6 4.4  6 35.3 11.3  3 17.6 • 5.9  5 29.4 11.6  17 7.9  Attendance  10 30.3 14.7  11 33.3 20.8  3 9.1 5.9  9 27.3 20.9  33 15.3  Unreliability  5 35.7 7.4  4 28.6 7.5  3 21.4 5.9  2 14.3 4.7  14 6.5  Dishonesty"  4 36.0 5.9  4 28.6 7.5  -5 35.7 9.8  1 7.1 2.3  14 6.5  Insubordination  18 36.0 26.5  10 20.0 18.9  18 36.0 35.3  4 8.0 9.3  50 23.3  Incompat i b l e  3 23.1 4.4  .3 23.1 5.7  4 30.8 7.8  3 23.1 7.0  13 6.0  Other  3 21.4 4.4  4 28.6 7.5  5 35.7 9.8  2 14.3 4.7  14 6.5  Column Total  68 31.6  53 24.7  51 23.7  43 20.0  215 100.0  back pay.  I t appears  that many employers f a i l e d to a p p r e c i a t e  the amount and q u a l i t y of evidence they would have to provide an a r b i t r a t o r before a d i s m i s s a l f o r incompetence would be upheld. In many d i s c h a r g e cases the employee's g u i l t  i s not i n q u e s t i o n .  67  There was  i s no d i s p u t e between the p a r t i e s over whether the g r i e v o r  absent  struck.  f o r many days of work, or whether a s u p e r v i s o r was  The  real  by the employer performance the g u i l t  issue i s whether the d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n  was  reasonable.  problems.  In d i s m i s s a l s concerning work  the c e n t r a l q u e s t i o n more o f t e n than not  of the g r i e v o r , and While employers  shortcomings  taken  concerns  i t i s here that employers  had l i t t l e  difficulty  of employees, they were unable  ran  into  in l i s t i n g  the  i n many cases to  prove that these shortcomings were any d i f f e r e n t or more s e r i o u s than those of the r e s t of the employer's source of the problem was  work f o r c e , that the  not beyond the employee's c o n t r o l , or  that the g r i e v o r c o u l d not respond to a l e s s e r form of disc i p l i n e . Employees dismissed f o r damaging company p r o p e r t y were r e i n s t a t e d i n over 80 percent of the c a s e s . be two  reasons why  employers  There appeared  encountered d i f f i c u l t y i n  j u s t i f y i n g the d i s m i s s a l of these employees.  Quite o f t e n these  were i s o l a t e d events in the employee's work h i s t o r y . cases a r b i t r a t o r s concluded that the employer  was  In other  indirectly  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the damage through a f a i l u r e to adequately the g r i e v o r or provide needed  to  train  supervision.  P r i o r s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e d no trend with respect to a r b i t r a t o r s ' d e c i s i o n s concerning a c t s of i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n . below average  rate of reinstatement i n t h i s study may  be e x p l a i n e d by the high degree accompanied many of the cases of  The  very well  of a g g r e s s i v e behaviour which insubordination.  68  Outcome by Occupation Table  20 presents  grievances figures  the a r b i t r a l  disposition  of discharge  on the b a s i s of the g r i e v o r ' s occupation.  o f f e r no c l u e s i n e x p l a i n i n g the o v e r a l l  employers.  The  record of  Only three o c c u p a t i o n a l groups, r e p r e s e n t i n g j u s t 35 TABLE 20 Outcome by Occupation  Count Row Pet  REINSTATEMENT WITH:  DISCHARGE OCCUPATION  UPHELD  NO BACK PAY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  Manager i a l , Admin, P r o f .  4 28.6  1 7.1  6 42.9  3 21.4  14 7.0  Clerical & Sales  4 21.1  5 26.3  4 21.1  6 31.6  19 9.5  Service  13 50.0  4 15.4  8 30.8  1 3.9  13 13.0  Logging & Mining .  6 46.2  3 23.1  2 15.4  2 15.4  13 6.5  Processing & Related  11 19.6  19 33.9  14 25.0  12 21.4  56 28.0  Construct ion Trades  5 35.7  7 50.0  2 14.3  0 0.0  14 7.0  Truck Dr i v e r s  9 31.0  6 20.7  6 20.7  8 27.6  29 14.5  Mater i a l Handling & Related  12 41.4  5 17.2  6 20.7  6 20.7  29 14.5  Column Total  64 32.0  50 25.0  48 24.0  38 19.0  200 100.0  percent percent.  of the sample, had reinstatement Thus, there was no evidence  r a t e s of l e s s than 60  to suggest that one or two  o c c u p a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s were the source  of the low o v e r a l l  69  percentage of d i s m i s s a l s  upheld.  Outcome by A r b i t r a t o r It was noted that  close  to 70 percent of the d i s c h a r g e  a r b i t r a t i o n s were heard by j u s t ten a r b i t r a t o r s .  Approximately  f i f t y a r b i t r a t o r s s e t t l e d the remaining g r i e v a n c e s . sharp d i f f e r e n c e s  i n a r b i t r a t i o n experience e x i s t e d  Because between  TABLE 21 Outcome by A r b i t r a l Experience Count Row Pet Col Pet ARBITRATORS  REINSTATEMENT WITH: DISCHARGE NO UPHELD BACK PAY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  Group 1  48 31.8 68.6  38 25.2 70.4  33 21.9 64.7  32 21.2 68.1  151 68.0  Group 2  22 31.0 31.4  16 22.5 29.6  18 25.4 35.3  15 21.1 31.9  71 32.0  Column Total  70 31.5  54 24.3  51 23.0  47 21.2  222 100.0  these two groups, the p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t e d produced  that  the awards  by each group may have been s u b s t a n t i a l l y  Table 21 shows that  different.  the a r b i t r a l d i s p o s i t i o n of d i s c h a r g e  grievances was independent  of the a r b i t r a t i o n group  for s e t t l i n g the d i s p u t e (t=-0.26 df=220 p=.799). of the ten most c a l l e d upon a r b i t r a t o r s l e s s experienced a r b i t r a t o r s  responsible, The  decisions  (group 1) and those of  (group 2) d i f f e r e d by l e s s than 5  percent f o r any given outcome c a t e g o r y .  1 0  T h e reader i s r e f e r r e d to Appendix 3 f o r the names of the a r b i t r a t o r s belonging to each group. 1 0  70  Outcome by Board Composition The  f i g u r e s presented  in. t a b l e 22 show that the a d d i t i o n of  an employer and union nominee to a board of a r b i t r a t i o n had no bearing  on the d e c i s i o n rendered by the board  p=.625).  (t=-0.49 df=220  The d e c i s i o n s of t r i p a r t i t e boards of a r b i t r a t i o n and  TABLE 22 Outcome by Board Compostion Count Row Pet  REINSTATEMENT WITH:  BOARD DISCHARGE NO COMPOSITION UPHELD BACK PAY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL BACK PAY  Row Total  Tripartite Board  34 32.7  27 26.0  21 20.2  22 21.1  104 46.9  Sole Arbitrator  36 30.5  27 22.2  30 25.4  25 21.2  118 .53.1  Column Total  70 31.5  54 24.3  51 23.0  47 21.2  222 100.0  those of s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s were very  nearly i d e n t i c a l .  e f f i c i e n c y of t r i p a r t i t e boards has a l r e a d y Multi-member boards used a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  been  The  questioned.  longer p e r i o d of time  to produce t h e i r d e c i s i o n s than d i d s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s . I t appears, t h e r e f o r e , that the p a r t i e s to the d i s p u t e s were prepared to accept with  the a d d i t i o n a l d e l a y s and c o s t s  t r i p a r t i t e boards i n favour  benefits.  of p e r c e i v e d  associated  political,  71  Outcome by Industry Table 23 presents the outcomes of discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s among the i n d u s t r i e s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r occurrence.  The most  noteworthy aspect of t h i s data i s the c o n s i s t e n c y of r e s u l t s TABLE 2 3 Outcome by Industry Count Row Pet Col Pet  REINSTATEMENT WITH: DISCHARGE NO UPHELD BACK PAY  INDUSTRY  PARTIAL BACK PAY  FULL Row BACK PAY T o t a l  Primary Industries  14 36.8 20.3  12 31.6 22.2  3 7.9 5.9  9 23.7 19.6  38 17.3  C o n s t r u c t ion  4 33.3 5.8  0 0.0 0.0  2 16.7 3.9  6 50.0 13.0  12 5.5  Manufacturing  20 27.0 29.0  20 27.0 37.0  20 27.0 39.2  14 18.9 30.4  74 33.6  Transportation Comm,Util  6 28.6 8.7  7 33.3 13.0  5 23.8 9.8  3 14.3 6.5  21 9.5  Trade  6 31.6 8.7  5 26.3 9.3  3 15.8 5.9  5 26.3 10.9  19 8.6  Service  19 33.9 27.5  10 17.9 18.5  18 32.1 35.3  9 16.1 19.6  56 25.5  Column Total  69 31.4  54 24.5  51 23.2  46 20.9  220 100.0  across i n d u s t r i e s .  0  Employers engaged i n primary  the most s u c c e s s f u l i n j u s t i f y i n g  i n d u s t r i e s were  their disciplinary actions, .  although only 36.8 percent of the d i s m i s s a l s i n those were upheld.  The lowest percentage  of d i s c h a r g e s  industries  upheld  72  occurred w i t h i n the manufacturing  s e c t o r i n which twenty-seven  percent of the g r i e v o r s from that i n d u s t r i a l category were not reinstated. upheld,  Thus, in terms of success  l e s s than a 10 percent margin separated  at e i t h e r  the  industries  extreme.  In chapter was  i n having d i s m i s s a l s  examined.  circumstances  four the e x i s t e n c e of discharge prone I t was  suggested  in those  p r o v i d e strong support  and  l o g g i n g i n d u s t r i e s which  i n d u s t r i e s , more than o t h e r s , to  take d i s m i s s a l s to a r b i t r a t i o n .  were upheld  at that time that there were  unique to the mining  might prompt unions  The  f i g u r e s i n t a b l e 23 do  f o r that h y p o t h e s i s .  i n the primary  industries  Too  not  few d i s m i s s a l s  i n d u s t r i e s to s e r i o u s l y  suggest  that  f a c t o r s other than the m e r i t s of the grievance were the d r i v i n g f o r c e behind  the "decision to proceed  to a r b i t r a t i o n .  Outcome by T o t a l O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment The  a n a l y s i s of the a r b i t r a l d i s p o s i t i o n of d i s c h a r g e  grievances has to t h i s p o i n t proceeded with very few c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n mind. a r b i t r a t o r s , and  poor r e c o r d .  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the g r i e v o r s , the  the employers were used as  v a r i a b l e s i n attempting  independent  to i s o l a t e the sources of management's  That a n a l y s i s generated  few c l u e s which might h e l p  e x p l a i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of outcomes of d i s c h a r g e in B r i t i s h Columbia.  Furthermore, even had  arbitrations  that e x e r c i s e been  more s u c c e s s f u l there c o u l d have been l i t t l e r e s u l t s obtained.  theoretical  satisfaction  Lacking a t h e o r i t i c a l base the  i n the  results  obtained c o u l d simply be a t t r i b u t e d to the unique c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the sample being analyzed.  An attempt  will  now  be made to e x p l a i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of outcomes observed  within a t h e o r i t i c a l  framework, the  more u n i v e r s a l a p p l i c a b i l i t y .  r e s u l t s of which may  It was  hypothesized  have  that:  The l a r g e r the o r g a n i z a t i o n , the more l i k e l y i t i s that management's d e c i s i o n to d i s m i s s an employee w i l l be upheld by a board of a r b i t r a t i o n . Support f o r t h i s hypothesis r e s t s on two concerning  the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  p r a c t i c e d by o r g a n i z a t i o n s Because the the day  imposition  to day  employees i t was  of d i s c i p l i n e  as  l e v e l s of employment. i s a l e s s l i k e l y event in  of an o r g a n i z a t i o n  of  few  assumed that p r o f i c i e n c y in the a p p l i c a t i o n of  c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e was category.  of i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e  of v a r y i n g  administration  assumptions  l e a s t l i k e l y among employers in t h i s  Consequently, these employers could be expected to  encounter the most d i f f i c u l t y arbitration  in c o n v i n c i n g  that the g r i e v o r ' s downfalls  improvement had,  boards of  and  needs f o r  through a system of p r o g r e s s i v e  been brought to the a t t e n t i o n of that  employee.  S t r u c t u r a l d i s s i m i l a r i t i e s between small and organizations  formed the b a s i s for the  l a r g e r an employer's labour  discipline,  large  second assumption.  f o r c e the more l i k e l y  The  i t i s to  find  a separate i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s or personnel department, w i t h i n which r e s t s f i n a l a u t h o r i t y to d i s m i s s D i s c i p l i n a r y d e c i s i o n s made on the independently reviewed and departments.  an  employee.  shop f l o o r can  c r i t i c a l l y analyzed  Such a screening  process should  be  i n these reduce  the  l i k e l i h o o d of d i s m i s s a l s provoked by emotional responses,  not  supported by the evidence, guided by a m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of c o l l e c t i v e agreement, and  so  on.  the  74  To t e s t the hypothesis the sample of employers partitioned  i n t o three a r b i t r a r i l y chosen  ( l e s s than 500 employees), large  first  s i z e c a t e g o r i e s : small  medium (501-5000 employees),  (more than 5000 employees).  employer,  was  and  Then, for each category of  the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s were c a l c u l a t e d . .  r e s u l t s of t h i s e x e r c i s e are presented in t a b l e 24.  The  A  r e l a t i o n s h i p d i d i n f a c t e x i s t between o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i z e the l i k e l i h o o d that a d i s c h a r g e p e n a l t y was or revoked  (Chi-square=173.08,  and  sustained, modified,  df=4, p<.001).  TABLE 24 Outcome by T o t a l O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment ORGANIZATIONAL DISCHARGE EMPLOYMENT UPHELD  PENALTY REDUCED  PENALTY REVOKED  31 29.0 47.0  46 43.0 53.5  30 28.0 69.8  107 54.9  501-5000  14 34.1 21.2  22 53.7 25.6  5 12.2 11.6  41 21.0  5000 +  21 44.7 31.8  18 38.3 20.9  8 17.0 18.6  47 24.1  Column Total  66 33.8  86 44.1  43 22.1  195 100.0  Less than  The  500  Row Total  source of the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s to be found i n columns one  three of t a b l e 24.  The percentage of d i s m i s s a l s upheld by  a r b i t r a t o r s grew with each organizational size.  and  incremental i n c r e a s e i n  Employers  of more than 5000 employees were  50 percent more s u c c e s s f u l than employers  of l e s s than  500  employees i n c o n v i n c i n g a r b i t r a t o r s of the n e c e s s i t y to impose as strong a d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n as d i s c h a r g e .  At the same time,  75  the percentage was,  of discharge p e n a l t i e s revoked  by  arbitrators  by a s u b s t a n t i a l margin, h i g h e s t f o r employers of fewer  than 500  employees.  Indeed, n e a r l y 70 percent of the  reinstatement with f u l l  back pay awards were d i r e c t e d  toward  employers i n the small employment c a t e g o r y . The  r e l a t i o n s h i p between o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i z e and  the  a r b i t r a l d i s p o s i t i o n of d i s c h a r g e g r i e v a n c e s i s f u r t h e r h i g h l i g h t e d by examining  the r e c o r d of some of the l a r g e r  before a r b i t r a t i o n boards.  Overall,  29.2  unions  percent of the  d i s m i s s a l s taken to a r b i t r a t i o n by the I.W.A. were upheld. Those d i s m i s s a l s can, however, be separated i n t o two equal groups: than 500  employees, and  more than 500 of  those which o r i g i n a t e d  the two  employees.  groups one  roughly  i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s of  those which arose  less  i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s of  Comparing the a r b i t r a t e d  f i n d s that i n the former  settlements  group  19.2  percent of the d i s m i s s a l s were upheld while i n the l a t t e r 40.9  percent of the d i s c h a r g e s were s u s t a i n e d .  divergence  A  group  similar  i n a r b i t r a t e d settlements e x i s t e d between the  Teamsters' and Steelworkers' unions.  Of the d i s m i s s a l s taken to  a r b i t r a t i o n by the Teamsters, 26 percent were upheld while i n 35 percent of the cases the g r i e v o r s were r e i n s t a t e d with f u l l pay.  Of the d i s m i s s a l s taken to a r b i t r a t i o n by  Steelworkers, 45 percent were upheld and  dissimilarities  the  in only 18 percent of  the cases were the g r i e v o r s r e i n s t a t e d with f u l l observed  back pay.  i n t h i s sample.  The  i n outcomes seems best e x p l a i n e d by  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the s i z e s of labour f o r c e s organized by unions  back  both  Workers o r g a n i z e d by the Teamsters were  employed p r i m a r i l y by o r g a n i z a t i o n s with small labour  forces.  76  In f a c t , c l o s e to 40 percent employers who  of these g r i e v o r s worked f o r  employed fewer than 50  individuals.  h o l d i n g membership with the Steelworkers were, by employed in the vast m a j o r i t y f o r c e s in excess of 500 The was  underlying  that e x p e r t i s e  force.  The  assumption used to e x p l a i n the above r e s u l t s in the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  of  industrial  s i z e of an  organization's  reasonableness of that assumption can  disciplinary  records  organization  responsible  were s t u d i e d  in r e l a t i o n to the s i z e of  for imposing the d i s c i p l i n a r y A  the  action.  systematic  found to e x i s t between o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i z e  the g r i e v o r s ' work records Associated  be  D e t a i l s of the g r i e v o r s ' p r i o r  r e s u l t s of that a n a l y s i s appear in t a b l e 25.  r e l a t i o n s h i p was  labour  employees.  t e s t e d from the data at hand.  The  comparison,  of cases by employers with  d i s c i p l i n e v a r i e s d i r e c t l y with the labour  Grievors  and  (Chi-square=33.53, df=4, p<.001).  with each upward movement in o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  employment was  an  increase  in the percentage of g r i e v o r s who  p r e v i o u s l y been d i s c i p l i n e d that l e d to d i s m i s s a l , and g r i e v o r s who  had  s i m i l a r to the  one  a decrease in the percentage of  not p r i o r to discharge  disciplinary action. downward trends  f o r an o f f e n s e  had  been subject  to  So pronounced were these upward  that g r i e v o r s dismissed  any  and  by employers of more  than 5,000 employees were twice as l i k e l y to have been previously d i s c i p l i n e d  for offenses  s i m i l a r to the one  leading  to d i s m i s s a l than to have never been a d i s c i p l i n a r y problem. the other  hand, a g r i e v o r f i r e d by an employer of fewer than  employees was  more l i k e l y  to have had  a clean  disciplinary  r e c o r d than to have been p r e v i o u s l y d i s c i p l i n e d  for a s i m i l a r  On 500  77  TABLE 2 5 O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Employment by D i s c i p l i n a r y Record of the G r i e v o r Sample ORGANIZATIONAL EMPLOYMENT BY DISCIPLINARY RECORD  CLEAN RECORD  PRI OR PRIOR Row UNRELATED RELATED MISCONDUCT MISCONDUCT T o t a l  Less than 500 employees  19 40.4 61.3  13 27.7 50.0  15 31.9 41.7  47 50.5  501-5000 employees  6 28.6 19.4  6 28.6 23.1  9 42.9 25.0  21 22.6  5000+ employees  6 24.0 19.4  7 28.0 26.9  12 48.0 33.3  25 26.9  Column Total  31 33.3  26 28.0  36 38.7  93 100.0  offense.  Furthermore,  there i s no evidence to suggest  those g r i e v o r s with c l e a n d i s c i p l i n a r y employed by an employer  records and who had been  i n the small employment category had  committed an o f f e n s e so s e r i o u s as to make a l e s s e r discipline  inappropriate.  r e i n s t a t e d with f u l l  that  form of  E i g h t of the nineteen g r i e v o r s were  back-pay.  Only two of those d i s m i s s a l s  were upheld.  Summary Evidence was i n t r o d u c e d i n t h i s chapter which  suggested  that the l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s m i s s a l being upheld by an a r b i t r a t o r in B r i t i s h Columbia  was s i g n i f i c a n t l y  the case i n other j u r i s d i c t i o n s .  lower than what has been  Although most of the e a r l i e r  s t u d i e s of the a r b i t r a l d i s p o s i t i o n of d i s c h a r g e g r i e v a n c e s have  78  s u f f e r e d from d e f e c t s i n sampling  techniques,  there was  reason  to b e l i e v e that an even g r e a t e r d i s c r e p a n c y would have been found  to e x i s t had  procedures  those  s t u d i e s adopted the same  as were employed i n t h i s t h e s i s .  because the r e s u l t s of the e a r l i e r because nothing was  chapter was  Furthermore,  s t u d i e s were so a l i k e ,  at an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l .  The  o b j e c t i v e of  An examination  r e l a t i o n s h i p was  so few d i s m i s s a l s were upheld  found  that i t i s unwise to  about the record of managers.  l i k e l i h o o d of a discharge p e n a l t y being upheld, by an a r b i t r a t o r .  significantly.  The  reduced,  or  small employers d i f f e r e d  Employers of r e l a t i v e l y  about 50 percent  the  a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d that the  of l a r g e and  50 percent more l i k e l y  A  to e x i s t between the s i z e of an  o r g a n i z a t i o n , measured i n terms of employment, and  a r b i t r a l experience  by  Columbia.  of the data suggested  make blanket statements  few employees were about  to see a r b i t r a t o r s revoke a d i s m i s s a l and  l e s s l i k e l y to see t h e i r d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s  than were employers i n the l a r g e s t  category.  this  to i s o l a t e those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i e s  a r b i t r a t o r s in B r i t i s h  upheld,  those  that management's record i n d i s c h a r g e  which appeared to e x p l a i n why  revoked  and  s a i d to the c o n t r a r y , i t appeared that  authors were s a t i s f i e d a r b i t r a t i o n s was  sampling  labour f o r c e  F a i l u r e to p r o p e r l y administer a program of  c o r r e c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e appeared to be the u n d e r l y i n g cause f o r the d i f f i c u l t y arbitration.  these employers experienced  before boards of  Thus, the low o v e r a l l percentage  of  upheld  d i s m i s s a l s i n B r i t i s h Columbia seemed best e x p l a i n e d by the poor r e c o r d of the n u m e r i c a l l y strong employers i n the 0-500 labour  force category.  80  CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The  o b j e c t i v e of t h i s t h e s i s was to provide a comprehensive  a n a l y s i s of discharge a r b i t r a t i o n awards f i l e d Columbia.  in British  I t i s noteworthy i n t h i s regard that the sample of  awards choosen c l o s e l y approximated the p o p u l a t i o n of a l l d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s which occurred i n B r i t i s h Columbia during the years 1974-1977. over the sampling The  T h i s represented a s i g n i f i c a n t  improvement  techniques adopted i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s .  a n a l y s i s was d i v i d e d i n two. F i r s t , a d e s c r i p t i v e  a n a l y s i s of the g r i e v o r s , employers, and a r b i t r a t o r s  contained  in the a r b i t r a t i o n awards was p r o v i d e d .  obtained  The r e s u l t s  are b e l i e v e d t o have c l e a r e d the way for more r i g o r o u s research in the area of i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e .  The q u e s t i o n s asked i n  the i n t r o d u c t i o n were i n v e s t i g a t e d , and the f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s made: 1. As hypothesized, a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y l a r g e number of the g r i e v o r s were males. Perhaps the best e x p l a n a t i o n f o r that occurrence i s t o be found i n the Kerr and S i e g e l hypothesis referred to e a r l i e r in this thesis. The occupations those authors d e s c r i b e d as a p p e a l i n g t o i n d i v i d u a l s u n l i k e l y t o e x h i b i t unacceptable behaviour a r e the ones i n which women a r e t y p i c a l l y found. 2. As p r e d i c t e d , a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of the sample came from the ranks of blue c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n s . In f a c t , over 80 percent of the g r i e v o r s h e l d blue c o l l a r p o s i t i o n s . Three o c c u p a t i o n a l g r o u p s — s e r v i c e employees, truck d r i v e r s , and p r o c e s s i n g o c c u p a t i o n s — a c c o u n t e d f o r almost one-half of the sample of grievors.  81  3. The a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d that about 80 percent of the sample had l e s s than f i v e years of s e n i o r i t y . Almost 50 percent of the g r i e v o r s had yet to accumulate two years of s e n i o r i t y . A mere 8.7 percent of the g r i e v o r s had more than 10 years s e n i o r i t y . These r e s u l t s were a l l c o n s i s t e n t with what had been hypothesized. 4. An examination of the d i s c i p l i n a r y records of the g r i e v o r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t , g e n e r a l l y speaking, t h e i r work records were not e x c e p t i o n a l l y poor. In f a c t , c l o s e to 20 percent of the g r i e v o r s had c l e a n work r e c o r d s . These o b s e r v a t i o n s were i n d i r e c t c o n t r a s t to what had been expected. 5. The g r i e v o r s were found to have belonged to a t o t a l of 43 unions. Of those unions, nine alone represented 70 percent of the g r i e v o r s . 6. Only 23 (9.9 percent) of the g r i e v o r s h e l d o f f i c a l union positions. L i t t l e evidence s u r f a c e d which would i n d i c a t e that these employees were d i s m i s s e d because of u n d e r l y i n g a n t i - u n i o n sentiments h e l d by t h e i r employers. 7. The three most prominent causes f o r d i s m i s s a l were for i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n (21.6 p e r c e n t ) , f o r reasons r e l a t e d to work performance (19.8 p e r c e n t ) , and f o r problems r e l a t e d to attendance (15.5 p e r c e n t ) . 8. There was some evidence to suggest the e x i s t e n c e of a r e l a t i o n s h i p between occupation and cause for d i s m i s s a l . White c o l l a r workers tended to be d i s m i s s e d f o r reasons r e l a t e d to how t h e i r work was done. Blue c o l l a r workers were f i r e d more o f t e n for a c t s of i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n . 9. Support was found f o r the hypothesis that an uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i s m i s s a l s e x i s t s amongst i n d u s t r i e s . I t was found, f o r example, that the mining i n d u s t r y experienced 3.8 times more d i s c h a r g e a r b i t r a t i o n s than what union membership f i g u r e s f o r that i n d u s t r y p r e d i c t e d . The s e r v i c e s e c t o r , on the other hand, had only 80 percent of the number of p r e d i c t e d discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s . The Kerr and S i e g e l hypothesis concerning the nature of jobs and the b e h a v i o u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of those i n d i v i d u a l s who are drawn to those jobs seemed best to e x p l a i n the p a t t e r n that emerged. 10. The sample of awards was dominated by employers of r e l a t i v e l y small labour f o r c e s . Nearly 60 percent of the employers employed a work f o r c e of l e s s than 500 employees. Close to one-quarter of the employers employed l e s s than 50 individuals. 11. Sole a r b i t r a t o r s handed down d e c i s i o n s approximately one week e a r l i e r than t r i p a r t i t e boards of a r b i t r a t i o n (15.9 days compared to 22.2 days on average). T o t a l elapsed time was 16 days longer (147 days compared to 131 days on average) when t r i p a r t i t e boards were used. Whether these s t a t i s t i c s are of p a r t i c u l a r s i g n i f i c a n c e i s open to one's personal outlook. To a  82  researcher these d i f f e r e n c e s in elapsed time may seem insignificant. To a g r i e v o r the a d d i t i o n a l delays a s s o c i a t e d with t r i p a r t i t e boards may be a matter of extreme concern. In chapter f i v e the undertaken.  second o b j e c t i v e of the  An attempt was  made to e x p l a i n the  outcomes of awards by searching  in chapter f o u r ) , and  statistical  in the awards  the  (and  the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s .  In examining those r e l a t i o n s h i p s l i s t e d chapter the  was  for r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i e s contained described  thesis  following conclusions  i n the  introductory  were a r r i v e d a t :  1. The d i s m i s s a l s of probationary employees were upheld by boards of a r b i t r a t i o n more than twice as often as was the case for r e g u l a r employees. 2. The suspected i n v e r s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e n i o r i t y and the l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s m i s s a l being upheld f a i l e d to m a t e r i a l i z e . L i t t l e v a r i a t i o n e x i s t e d between the p a t t e r n of outcomes observed and the s e n i o r i t y of the g r i e v o r s . 3. A strong r e l a t i o n s h i p was found to e x i s t between the g r i e v o r s ' work records and the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s . The l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s m i s s a l being upheld for a g r i e v o r who had r e c e i v e d some d i s c i p l i n a r y penalty f o r an o f f e n s e r e l a t e d to the one which produced the d i s m i s s a l was s i x times g r e a t e r than that of a g r i e v o r with a c l e a n work r e c o r d , and more than twice as l i k e l y as the g r i e v o r s who had been d i s c i p l i n e d f o r misconduct u n r e l a t e d to the cause f o r d i s m i s s a l . G r i e v o r s with clean work records were a l s o three times more l i k e l y to be r e i n s t a t e d with f u l l back than were employees with blemished work records. 4. No r e a l i n s i g h t s were gained by e x p l o r i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between cause for d i s m i s s a l and the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s . It was found, however, t h a t employees dismissed f o r reasons r e l a t e d to work performance stood a b e t t e r chance of being r e i n s t a t e d with f u l l back-pay than g r i e v o r s dismissed for other reasons. 5. and  No r e l a t i o n s h i p emerged between the d e c i s i o n s of a r b i t r a t o r s the occupations of the g r i e v o r s .  6. The d e c i s i o n s of those a r b i t r a t o r s widely used and those of a r b i t r a t o r s used s p a r i n g l y were found to be v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l . 7. The a d d i t i o n of an employer and union nominee to a board of a r b i t r a t i o n had no o v e r a l l bearing on the f i n a l outcome. The d e c i s i o n s of s o l e a r b i t r a t o r s and t r i p a r t i t e boards of a r b i t r a t i o n were very n e a r l y the same.  83  8. No r e l a t i o n s h i p was f o u n d t o e x i s t between t h e i n d u s t r i e s from w h i c h t h e g r i e v o r s came and t h e outcomes o f t h e arbitrations. 9. A r e l a t i o n s h i p was f o u n d t o e x i s t between o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i z e and t h e l i k e l i h o o d of a d i s c h a r g e b e i n g u p h e l d . Employers of more t h a n 5000 e m p l o y e e s were 50 p e r c e n t more s u c c e s s f u l t h a n e m p l o y e r s o f l e s s than 500 e m p l o y e e s i n c o n v i n c i n g a r b i t r a t o r s of t h e n e c e s s i t y t o impose as s t r o n g a d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n as discharge. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e l a r g e s t p e r c e n t a g e o f awards o r d e r i n g r e i n s t a t e m e n t w i t h f u l l back pay o c c u r r e d among e m p l o y e r s o f l e s s than 500 e m p l o y e e s .  The  most  practical thesis  implications.  was  employers record  in  t o uncover in British  contribution One  of  ingredient  skills  on  reasons Columbia  of t h a t  the p a r t  t h e s e employers  procedures Failure  to follow  to n o t i f y  dismissal,  and  What a p p e a r s  to imposing  t o document  records  500  than  than  5000 employees were, by  been p r e v i o u s l y t h e one records.  w h i c h prompted One  cannot  shortcomings  a  forces  prior  to  experienced.  disciplined  believe  that  clean  employers  t w i c e as  than  employers  for a  offense similar  the d i s m i s s a l  h e l p but  namely  administrative  t o have had  comparison, f o r an  a very  the d i s c h a r g e p e n a l t y .  E m p l o y e e s d i s m i s s e d by  disciplined  t o be  E m p l o y e e s d i s m i s s e d by  t o have been p r e v i o u s l y  of m i s c o n d u c t .  poor  i n t o o many c a s e s  employers  w o r k e r s were more l i k e l y  form  why  t h o s e e x c h a n g e s were t h e most  speaks  for i t s e l f .  the  with small labour  an employee o f h i s / h e r  failure  in i t s  of  identified,  I t appeared  The  than  was  of employers  downfalls small labour force  less  concerns  were s i m p l y unaware of t h e prior  lies  have e x p e r i e n c e d s u c h a  frequent data  study  w h i c h would h e l p e x p l a i n  problem  administering discipline.  that  of t h i s  of t h e c e n t r a l  in discharge a r b i t r a t i o n s .  important lack  important  work  related o f more  likely  t o have  i n nature  t o have had many c a s e s  of  clean  to work  involving  84  small  labour force  arbitration proper  s t a g e had  follow The  there  would n e v e r  these employers  steps to follow  made aware of to  employers  when i m p o s i n g  educate  their This  labour forces  officials. procedure.  1  associated concerned  boards  about  objective  and  The  been  employers  about  the  been not  unions  given  implementing  general p r i n c i p l e s  methods of  disciplining  industrial  relations.  u n i o n s , and  government  has  become an  expensive  bear  the brunt  of t h e c o s t s  But  t h e Government  efficiency  should  of the g r i e v a n c e  d i s p u t e s which the p a r t i e s  identified suggested  this that  be  arbitration  aware o f t h e c o n c e p t  s h o u l d more  before  appropriately  themselves.  problem, one  can  t h e r e i s a need  b e i n g u n n e c e s s a r i l y j e o p a r d i z e d by p l a c i n g  by  a  Clearly  of e m p l o y e r s ,  Employers  settled  Having  e r a of  arbitration  as w e l l .  The  applied.  Grievance  be  had  i s most d i s t u r b i n g  the proper  i n today's  of a r b i t r a t i o n  have been  has  an  and  with a r b i t r a t i o n .  p r o c e s s may  It  understood  employers  s h o u l d be  and  should they d e c i d e  difficult  p r o g r a m of p r o g r e s s i v e d i s c i p l i n e .  to  discipline  t h e above d a t a  i s nothing exceptionally  both e a s i l y  the  steps.  e x i s t e n c e of  be  reached  been more c o g n i z a n t of  the probable consequences  those  have  what t h e n  possible  i s the  solution  of c o r r e c t i v e  solution?  i s t o make  discipline  and  how  D a v i d B r u c e , "A S u r v e y o f A r b i t r a t i o n C o s t s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , " L a b o u r R e s e a r c h B u l l e t i n , F e b r u a r y , 1979, p. 17, r e p o r t s t h a t d u r i n g 1977 t h e a v e r a g e c o s t t o t h e p a r t i e s i n g r i e v a n c e a r b i t r a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g a s i n g l e a r b i t r a t o r was $2160, and t h a t t h i s f i g u r e was $2930 when a multi-member b o a r d o f a r b i t r a t i o n heard the g r i e v a n c e . x  85  it  is p r a c t i c a l l y applied.  Who  which employers should r e c e i v e should be asked.  funded, are  way  j u s t a few  and  how  project, the  program  of the q u e s t i o n s that must  i s simply u n f e a s i b l e  f i n a n c i a l , or p r a c t i c a l reasons.  be  for  Perhaps the  only  many employers w i l l continue to l e a r n of the proper ways of  administering  d i s c i p l i n e w i l l be by  in a r b i t r a t o r s ' awards. some d e s c r i p t i o n could the b e n e f i t s could of  information,  Perhaps such a p r o j e c t  political,  should organize that  individuals.  educational possible  be  If however an e d u c a t i o n a l be devised and  far-reaching  A s s e s s i n g the  Finally,  successfully  and  in and  follow-up to t h i s study.  The  implemented  of such an  of  which i s worthy of  i t seems a p p r o p r i a t e  package of  enjoyed by a wide range  feasibility  program i s a p r o j e c t  b e n e f i t s , one  l e a r n i n g of t h e i r mistakes  i t s e l f , and immediate  given  attention.  at t h i s time to suggest a  analyses contained i n t h i s t h e s i s  have been g l o b a l  in nature.  micro a n a l y s i s .  Case-by-case examinations of d i s m i s s a l s  at a small  What now  appears to be needed i s a  number of predetermined firms  should be  arising  undertaken.  At t h i s l e v e l of a n a l y s i s , f o r example, the d e c i s i o n making process of employers in a p p l y i n g responding to those a c t i o n s following  the  can  t h i s l e v e l of a n a l y s i s  d i s c i p l i n e , and be b e t t e r  of unions i n  understood.  By  s o l u t i o n s to many of  the  q u e s t i o n s l e f t unanswered i n t h i s t h e s i s may  be  found.  86  SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY  Adams, George W. "Concepts of I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e and T h e i r Results." Paper presented at the I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s Centre, Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , K i n g s t o n , O n t a r i o , 12 May 1978. Baer, Walter E. P r a c t i c e and Precendent in Labor Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company, 1972. Baer, Walter E. Agreement. 1972.  Relations.  D i s c i p l i n e and Discharge Under the Labor New York: American Management A s s o c i a t i o n ,  B i r d , R.B. " S u b s t i t u t i o n of P e n a l i t e s Under the Labour Code." In Grievance A r b i t r a t i o n : A Review of Current Issues, pp. 61-76. E d i t e d by M.A. Hickling. Vancouver, B.C.: I n s t i t u t e of I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , 1977. Boise, W i l l i a m B. " S u p e r v i s o r s ' A t t i t u d e s Toward D i s c i p l i n a r y Actions." Personnel A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 28 (1965) 24-27. Brown, D.J.M. and Beatty, D.M. Canadian Labour A r b i t r a t i o n . A g i n c o u r t : Canada Law Book L i m i t e d , 1977. Davey, H.W. "How J o u r n a l , 27  A r b i t r a t o r s Decide Cases." (1977), 297-287.  The  Arbitration  Davey, H.W. "The A r b i t r a t o r Speaks on Discharge and Discipline." The A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 17 (1962), 97-104. Davis, Pearce and P a t i , Gopal C. "Elapsed Time P a t t e r n s in Labor A r b i t r a t i o n : 1942-1972." The A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 29 (1974), 15-27. E l k o u r i , Frank and E l k o u r i Edna A. How A r b i t r a t i o n Works. T h i r d E d i t i o n . Washington, D.C: The Bureau of N a t i o n a l A f f a i r s , Inc. 1973. F i s h e r , Robert W. " A r b i t r a t i o n of Discharge Cases." Labor Review, 91 (1968) 1-5. Fleming, R.W. The Labor A r b i t r a t i o n Process. U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1965.  Monthly  Urbana:  H o l l y , Fred J . " C o n s i d e r a t i o n s in Discharge Cases." Labor Review, 80 (1957), 684-688.  Monthly  Jennings, Ken and Wolter, Roger. "Discharge Cases Reconsidered." The A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 31 (1976), 180.  164-  87  Jones, D a l l a s L. " R a m i f i c a t i o n s of Back-Pay Awards i n Suspension and Discharge Cases." In A r b i t r a t i o n and S o c i a l Change, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting, N a t i o n a l Academy of A r b i t r a t o r s , pp. 163-175. E d i t e d by Gerald G. Somers, Washington, D . C : BNA Books, 1969. Kadish, Sanford H. "The C r i m i n a l Law and I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e as S a n c t i o n i n g Systems : Some Comparative O b s e r v a t i o n s . " In A r b i t r a t i o n and S o c i a l Change, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting, N a t i o n a l Academy of A r b i t r a t o r s , pp. 125-144. E d i t e d by Mark L. Kahn. Washington, D . C : Bureau of N a t i o n a l A f f a i r s , 1964. Larson, Dalton L. "Probationary Employees." In Grievance A r b i t r a t i o n : A Review of Current Issues, pp. 77-100. E d i t e d by M.A. H i c k l i n g . Vancouver, B.C.: I n s t i t u t e of I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , 1977. L e v i n , N.A., ed. A r b i t r a t i n g Law I n s t i t u t e , 1974.  Labor Cases.  New York:  Practicing  Myers, Howard A. "Concepts of I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e . " In Management R i g h t s and the A r b i t r a t i o n Process, Proceedings of the N i n t h Annual Meeting, N a t i o n a l Academy of A r b i t r a t o r s , pp. 59-76. E d i t e d by Jean T. McKelvey. Washington, D . C : BNA, 1956. Peach, David A. "Union and Management D e c i s i o n Making i n the Grievance Process." R e l a t i o n s I n d u s t r i e l l e s , 27 (1972), 757-767. Petersen, Donald J . "Why Unions Go to A r b i t r a t i o n . " 48, No.4 (1971), 44-47.  Personnel,  Phelps, Orne W. D i s c i p l i n e and D i s c h a r g e i n the U n i o n i z e d Firm. B e r k e l e y : U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1959. P r a s o w , P a u l and P e t e r s , E. A r b i t r a t i o n and C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g : C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n i n Labor R e l a t i o n s . York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970.  New  Rosen, Benson and Jerdee, Thomas H. " F a c t o r s I n f l u e n c i n g D i s c i p l i n a r y Judgements." J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Psychology, 59 (1974), 327-331. Ross, Arthur M. " D i s c u s s i o n " o f ' S a n f o r d H. Kadish, "The C r i m i n a l Law and I n d u s t r i a l D i s c i p l i n e as S a n c t i o n i n g Systems : Some Comparative O b s e r v a t i o n s . " In Labor A r b i t r a t i o n - P e r s p e c t i v e s and Problems, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting, pp. 144-152. E d i t e d by Mark L. Kahn. Washington, D.C.:Bureau of N a t i o n a l A f f a i r s , 1964. S t e s s i n , Lawrence. Employee D i s c i p l i n e . Bureau of N a t i o n a l A f f a i r s , 1960.  Washington,  D . C : The  88  T e e l e , John W. "But No Back-Pay i s Awarded." J o u r n a l , 19 (1964), 103-114.  The  Arbitration  T e e l e , John W. "The Thought Process of the A r b i t r a t o r . " A r b i t r a t i o n J o u r n a l , 17 (1965) 85-95. . Updegroff, C M . D.C. BNA,  Arbitration 1970.  and Labor R e l a t i o n s .  The  Washington,  APPENDIX 1 Occupational  Classification  Managerial,  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and  related  Occupations  i n n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s , e n g i n e e r i n g and  Occupations in s o c i a l s c i e n c e s and - s o c i a l work - l i b r a r y , museum, a r c h i v a l Teaching  and  related  occupations.  related  mathematics  fields,  occupations.  Occupations i n medicine and h e a l t h , - h e a l t h diagnosing and t r e a t i n g - n u r s i n g , therapy, and r e l a t e d a s s i s t i n g Artistic,  literary,  r e c r e a t i o n a l and  related  occupations.  C l e r i c a l and r e l a t e d occupatio"ns. -stenographic and t y p i n g -bookkeeping, account - r e c o r d i n g and r e l a t e d - o f f i c e maching and e l e c t r o n i c data - p r o c e s s i n g equipment operators - m a t e r i a l r e c o r d i n g , s c h e d u l i n g , and d i s t r i b u t i n g - l i b r a r y , f i l e and correspondence c l e r k s - r e c e p t i o n , i n f o r m a t i o n , mail and message d i s t r i b u t i o n -other c l e r i c a l Sales occupations, -commodities -services 'Service o c c u p a t i o n s . -protective services -food and beverage p r e p a r a t i o n - l o d g i n g and other accomodation -personal service - a p p a r e l and f u r n i s h i n g s -other s e r v i c e Farming, h o r t i c u l t u r a l and animal F i s h i n g , hunting, and t r a p p i n g . F o r e s t r y and  logging.  husbandry.  90  Mining and q u a r r y i n g i n c l u d i n g o i l and  gas.  P r o c e s s i n g occupations, -mineral ore t r e a t i n g -metal p r o c e s s i n g - c l a y , g l a s s and stone p r o c e s s i n g , forming -chemicals, petroleum, rubber, p l a s t i c -food and beverage -wood p r o c e s s i n g i n c l u d i n g pulp and papermaking -textile Machining. -metal -metal -wood -clay,  machining shaping and forming machining stone and gas  Product f a b r i c a t i n g , assembling, -metal products -electrical -wood - t e x t i l e s , fur, leather -rubber, p l a s t i c -mechanics and r e p a i r s  and  repairing,  Construction trades. - e x c a v a t i n g , grading, paving -electricians -painters -plumbers and boilermakers -carpenters -other Transport equipment o p e r a t i n g -air -railway -water -motor M a t e r i a l s h a n d l i n g and  related  Other equipment o p e r a t i n g -printing  occupations,  occupations.  occupations,  - s t a t i o n a r y engineers and u t i l i t i e s General  equipment o p e r a t i n g  labourers. .  Note: Based on c l s a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme adopted i n 1971 Census of Canada. See: S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1971 Census of Canada: Occupations, Catalogue 94-736, V o . : l l l Part 3 ( B u l l e t i n 3.3-9).  91  APPENDIX 2 Industrial Classification PRIMARY INDUSTRY—this i n d u s t r i a l group i s i n v o l v e d with resource e x t r a c t i o n . F i s h i n g , mining, and l o g g i n g are B r i t i s h Columbia's major primary i n d u s t r i e s . CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY--the c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y i n c l u d e s b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , highway c o n s t r u c t i o n , bridge c o n s t r u c t i o n , and s p e c i a l i z e d c o n s t r u c t i o n such as dam construction. Operating w i t h i n t h i s i n d u s t r y are general c o n t r a c t o r s and s p e c i a l trade c o n t r a c t o r s . MANUFACTURING—the term used to d e s c r i b e i n d u s t r i e s which process resources i n order to produce f i n i s h e d goods. Food and Beverage I n d u s t r y — a manufacturing i n d u s t r y producing food and/or beverage goods through some process. This industry i s d i s t i n c t from the a g r i c u l t u r e i n d u s t r y and/or trade i n d u s t r y because of i t s p r o c e s s i n g f u n c t i o n . F o r e s t P r o d u c t s — t h e i n d u s t r y producing lumber, plywood, wooden boxes, and c o f f i n s as well" as pulp, paper, and paper products. P r i n t i n g , P u b l i s h i n g , and A l l i e d Industries—commercial p r i n t i n g , s t e r e o t y p i n g , p u b l i s h i n g , and a s s o c i a t e d a c t i v i t i e s belong t o t h i s i n d u s t r i a l group. Primary Metal and Metal F a b r i c a t i n g I n d u s t r y — t h e industry p r o c e s s i n g metal ores through smelting, r e f i n i n g , c a s t i n g , and r o l l i n g , i n order to produce metals i n bulk form or i n the form of a simple f a b r i c a t e d product such as b o i l e r s , ornamental metal, stamped metal, wire c a s t i n g , f o r g i n g , e t c . Machinery, T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and E l e c t r i c a l Equipment--this i n d u s t r y i s p r i m a r i l y concerned with the production of machinery, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n equipment and e l e c t r i c a l products but a l s o i n v o l v e s equipment r e p a i r and p a r t s p r o d u c t i o n . Miscellaneous Manufacturing—industries of minor importance i n terms of union membership c o n c e n t r a t i o n s . Some of the i n d u s t r i e s i n t h i s group a r e tobacco i n d u s t r y , the rubber i n d u s t r y , the f u r n i t u r e i n d u s t r y and the chemical i n d u s t r y . TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND OTHER U T I L I T I E S — a i r , land, and sea t r a n s p o r t , storage, communication and p r o v i s i o n of u t i l i t i e s such as e l e c t r i c a l power and sewers a r e the a c t i v i t i e s a s s o c i a t e d with t h i s i n d u s t r y . TRADE—the wholesale, r e t a i l and market f u n c t i o n s are the a c t i v i t i e s of the trade i n d u s t r y . SERVICE INDUSTRY—this i n d u s t r y i s composed of f i v e subindustries. E d u c a t i o n a l S e r v i c e s — t h i s sub-industry covers the elementary through secondary e d u c a t i o n a l s e r v i c e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , but not librarians. H e a l t h and W e l f a r e — t h i s sub-industry covers a l l p r i v a t e and p u b l i c h e a l t h and welfare s e r v i c e . Other S e r v i c e s — a l l other community, business, and p e r s o n a l s e r v i c e s not covered by the school and h e a l t h and welfare sub-  92  goups. M u n i c i p a l S e r v i c e s — t h i s sub-group covers a l l m u n i c i p a l government employees from policeman through urban p l a n n e r s . P r o v i n c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n — c o v e r s the employees of the p r o v i n c i a l government.  Source: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y of Labour, B.C. Labour D i r e c t o r y ( V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r , 1974), p.11. NOTE: Not a l l of the i n d u s t r i e s d e s c r i b e d f a l l under the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the B r i t i s h Columbia Labour Code and thus l i e o u t s i d e the scope of t h i s study.  93  APPENDIX 3 Chairmen of A r b i t r a t i o n Boards Appearing in the Sample Studied J.C. Sherlock (41) R.B. B i r d (18) R.G. Clements (17) R. N e i l Monroe (13) J.M. Maclntyre (12) C l i v e McKee (12) R.G. Herbert (10) Mervin Chertkow (10) Bryan W i l l i a m s (9) Dalton L. Larson (9) Donald R. Monroe (5) Kenneth C. Murphy (4) D.R. B l a i r (4) H.A. Hope (3) W.H. Sands (3) J.C. Smith (3) C R . Margeson (2) M.A. H i c k l i n g (2) D. Sutton (2) B.B. T r e v i n o (2) T. F i n k e l s t e i n (2) Paul D.K. F r a s e r (2) Terrence P. Warren (2) C l a r k (2) A.W. B i l s l a n d (2) Bruce McColl (1) Gordon Wilson (1) K.C MacRae (1) T e r r y J . Wuester  E.H. Mosby (1) Morley D. S h o r t t (1) R.P. Gibbons (1) D.G. MacDonald (1) D. Duff (1) R.A. MacDonald (1) Bruce Rolson (1) James P.R. Mason (1) Joe Weiler (1) Lee L e i b i k (1) Mary F. Southin (1) J.L. G a l l a g e r (1) John Brown (1) George A. Goyer (1) Angus MacDonald (1) Gordon H. Gilmour (1) Ronald C E . M e l l e t t (1) H.A. Callaghan (1) W. James W i l l i a m (1) Paul Sims (1) L y l e Anderson (1) L. McGrady (1) D.T. Wetmore (1) W i l l i a m Davis (1) H.G. Ladner (1) L . J . Glasner (1) R.S.S. Wilson (1) Frank Maczko R.E. Cocking (1)  Note: The f i g u r e s i n p a r e n t h e s i s represent the number of d e c i s i o n s an a r b i t r a t o r f i l e d which f e l l i n t o one of the four outcome c a t e g o r i e s .  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095137/manifest

Comment

Related Items