FAQ's Cases - Stewart McKelvey

voice. Mr. Mutter also indicated that it was clear Mr. Keen was agitated and was veryemotional.All three categorically denied during each of their testimony that Mr. Keen couldhave meant the words as simply a comment relating to a safety concern.After Mr. Mutter returned to the office, he and Mr. Wallace spoke with Mr. Birchfor a while and then the latter returned to work after about thirty minutes. Mr. Mutter andMr. Wallace called the Union and indicated Mr. Keen would have to be terminated. Theythen phoned the Company’s Human Resources Department and indicated what hadhappened.There was a further call with the HR Department on Monday morning followingwhich Mr. Mutter called Mr. Keen to inform him he was being terminated. A terminationletter was prepared and provided to Mr. Keen and it stated, in part:As discussed with you today, a decision has been made to terminate youremployment with Lafarge Canada Inc., effective immediately.2011 CanLII 85129 (BC LA)You are being terminated for cause. As an employee of Lafarge Canada Inc.,the expectation is that all employees conduct themselves in a manner whichupholds a regard for business professionalism. Your threatening behaviour andverbal utterances on August 20, 2010 showed a complete disrespect for yourfellow colleagues and a disregard for the basic elements of business conduct andprofessionalism. The Company in no way tolerates this type of behaviour andafter careful consideration your employment is being terminated effectiveimmediately. This decision is irrevocable.Any money owing to you for work performed will be paid to you less statutorydeductions on your final payroll cycle…During his testimony the Grievor indicated that in his discussion with Mr.Wallace he had been very vague about his actual concerns with Mr. Birch. He stated hewas not clear in his remarks that Mr. Birch was after his job; his real issue had beenwhether Mr. Birch was operating the excavator during the 2 – 4 hour gap between the endof the day shift and the time Mr. Keen commenced work. He also agreed that when Mr.Wallace summarized Mr. Keen’s concerns to Mr. Mutter after the latter arrived at theoffice, Mr. Keen never corrected Mr. Wallace. The Grievor also agreed his alleged safetyconcerns were mentioned once and only very briefly at the beginning of his conversationwith Mr. Wallace.With respect to the conversation in Mr. Mutter’s office after Mr. Birch arrived,Mr. Keen testified that he could not remember the rest of the conversation after Mr.7