Arlington Home for the Aged

Gordon worked as a food service attendant at Arlington Home for the Aged. His job description included preparing food and assisting residents who could not feed themselves. Gordon had been working for his employer for almost three years when he was involved in an incident that led to his dismissal.

On the day in question Gordon was working in the kitchen with two female coworkers, washing dishes and preparing food. Music was playing on the radio, and one of Gordon's coworkers asked him. "Are you going to do a little dance for us?" The other employee asked. "Are you uncomfortable with your body?" Gordon left the kitchen, went to a nearby storage area, removed all his clothing and went back to the kitchen. He streaked in front of his two coworkers, waving his arms to get their attention. The incident lasted a few seconds. Gordon returned a few minutes later with his clothes on and laughed about what he had done.

The next day Gordon bragged to several coworkers about what he had done and how funny it was. When management questioned Gordon, he admitted that he had streaked his coworkers. The employer investigated the incident and found Gordon had no explanation for his behaviour other than he was joking with his coworkers. Gordon apologized to his coworkers after management spoke to him.

The employer had a code of conduct and policy on workplace harassment in place, which provided that if the policy was breached the penalties included dismissal. It was confirmed during the investigation that Gordon had attended training on these policies and was aware of their content. The employer terminated Gordon and the letter of termination stated that he had violated the employer's policies, and the employer could not condone sexual harassment in the workplace.

The union representing Gordon filed a grievance challenging the dismissal. The grievance states that Gordon has been "disciplined without just cause" contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement and requests he be "made whole" (reinstated to his job with no loss of compensation or seniority).

The dispute has gone through the grievance process and will now go to arbitration.

As a Management Argument in Rebuttal answer the following:

1. Respond to the review of the evidence provided by the opposing representative; any unfair or inaccurate analyses of the evidence should be pointed out

2. Identify and deal with any legal issues raised in the argument in chief

3. Do other arbitrations on the same or similar point support the opposing representative's position?

4. Is there another article in the collective agreement, which more directly covers the situation, or ... qualifies the first article?