CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION

& DISPUTE RESOLUTION

CASE NO. 4303

Heard in Montreal, April 9, 2014

Concerning

VIA RAIL CANADA INC.

And

UNIFOR

DISPUTE:

Concerning the dismissal of Mr. Alex Ghazarian.

JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE:

Following an investigation held on September 12, 2013, a decision was made to terminate the employment of Mr. Alex Ghazarian at Via Rail. The Corporation contends that Mr. Ghazarian was dismissed for an accumulation of demerit marks. The Corporation further contends that the disciplinary assessment was within the acceptable range of discipline for this type of infraction and consequently, the termination was justified. The Corporation contends that Mr. Ghazarian's termination is justified based on the evidence submitted. In the Union's opinion that discipline was unwarranted and the employer has failed to make its case that the grievor is guilty of the alleged wrongdoing. The Union seeks reinstatement of Mr. Alex Ghazarian without loss of wages, benefits or seniority; and to make him whole.

FOR THE UNION: FOR THE COMPANY:

*(SGD.) R. Fitzgerald (SGD.) M. Boyer National Representative Senior Advisor, Employee Relations*

There appeared on behalf of the Company: M. Boyer – Senior Advisor, Employee Relations, Montreal R. Rowell – Officer, C.E., Toronto

There appeared on behalf of the Union: R. Fitzgerald – National Staff Representative, Toronto D. Andru – Regional Representative, Toronto A. Ghazarian – Grievor, Toronto

CROA&DR 4303

AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR

The facts giving rise to this grievance are not in substantial dispute. On August

3 rd^ , 2013 the grievor was involved with a group of some 38 passengers travelling from

Toronto to Jasper and who were represented by Globus Tours. The tour company had

requested the services of a Red Cap to assist with the passengers’ baggage. It appears

that the tour leader had a conversation with the grievor. Mr. Ghazarian advised the tour

leader that the understanding was that he should receive three dollars per bag that he

was required to move. In fact the tour leader had apparently negotiated a rate of two

dollars and fifty cents per bag, and that no more than that would be paid. It also

emerges that during the course of this exchange the grievor did not use his true name,

but told the tour leader that his name was “Alex Smith”.

Upon a review of the evidence I am satisfied that the grievor conducted himself

improperly in relation to the customers he was servicing. On its face, I can understand

the Corporation’s decision to assess twenty-five demerits against the grievor as his

discipline record previously stood at fifty-five demerits, which resulted in his termination.

It is also noteworthy that the grievor was subject to a return to work agreement dated

February 5, 2013, following an earlier termination of his services.

Upon a review of the material filed, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to fashion

an Award which gives to the grievor a last chance to demonstrate that he can be a good

and productive employee. The grievance is therefore allowed, in part. The Arbitrator

directs that the grievor be reinstated into his employment forthwith, subject to the

• 2 –

CROA&DR 4303

• 3 –

conditions established in the letter of January 29, 2013 concerning his previous return to

work. Those conditions shall remain in effect for not less than two years from the date of

the grievor’s reinstatement. His reinstatement shall further be without compensation for

any wages or benefits lost, and without loss of seniority.

April 14, 2014 _______________________________

MICHEL G. PICHER

ARBITRATOR