Dismissal Overturned: High Workload and Poor Supervision Contributed to Misconduct and Poor Job Performance
An OPSEU member with the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa-Carleton was recently reinstated to employment under an arbitration award that also considered the grievor’s workload and the conduct of her managers.
The grievor was a social worker with 2 years experience. The Employer dismissed her following several incidents of misconduct, including falsifying expense claims and failing to remit restitution payments from a Crown ward. The Employer also alleged that the grievor’s job performance was very poor. Documentation on a number of files
was incomplete or inaccurate.
The Arbitrator reviewed the allegations and found that the grievor had shown poor judgment and carelessness. She had also failed to inform the Employer of her situation, and had lied to cover-up how far behind she was in her work. However, there was insufficient evidence of fraudulent intent or a breach of trust. Her poor performance
did not amount to willful neglect. The Arbitrator concluded that no discipline was warranted for the job performance issues. While the grievor’s other misconduct was deserving of discipline, dismissal was excessive.
In reaching these decisions, the Arbitrator emphasized that the grievor’s misconduct was “closely related to the emotional state she was in as a result of her workload and lack of support.” The grievor was carrying a workload that would have been heavy even for an experienced Social Worker. The Arbitrator described the importance of
support in this workplace:
“…in this milieu, there is an expectation that Social Workers, particularly inexperienced ones, will receive close supervision. Not only are the decisions that Social Workers make about the lives of vulnerable children too important to be left to their sole discretion, but it is critical that there be appropriate follow-up on files… It
is easy, it seems to me, for inexperienced employees to become snowed under by their weighty responsibilities… These employees need to be carefully monitored and they need support.”
Despite the need for supervision, the Arbitrator found that the grievor’s supervisor had no idea that she was falling behind in her workload. The arbitrator concluded that:
“The grievor was an inexperienced young Social Worker who got in over her head…. The employer must bear some responsibility for allowing this situation to have developed… [With different management] the situation would have been promptly identified and nipped in the bud, the grievor would have received some help or some relief and she
would have long since resumed her career as a productive, caring Social Worker.”
Finally, the Arbitrator concluded that the discharge should be set aside. The Arbitrator did not make an award for lost wages or benefits because the grievor had lied to the Employer to cover-up her job performance. Also, the Arbitrator confirmed that the Employer had a right to require a medical assessment before the grievor returned
to work.
Click here for full text of decision
Legal Update Index
