Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ISSUES:
Whether the University had the required Just Cause to
terminate the grievant and it not, what shall the remedy
be?
_____________________________________________________________
WITNESSES:
The parties presented 3 witnesses to testify before the
Arbitrator.
BRIEFS:
Each party filed a timely and well crafted brief on their
respective positions for consideration by the Arbitrator.
TRANSCRIPTS:
A complete transcript and all exhibits from each party
were received, read and considered by the Arbitrator.
ARBITRATION HEARING:
The Parties have submitted their dispute over a timely filed
grievance
the University.
arbitration
The parties consistent with their CBA agreed to move the matter
to
Arbitrator.
The union met and exceeded its duty of fair representation to the
grievant.
All witnesses testified under oath and both parties had ample and
sufficient
grievant.
BACKGROUND:
The University considered a series of comments and remarks
including an
grievant.
of the department.
3
The PBA contends that the University did not have Just Cause to
terminate
the grievant and if it failed to meet any one of the 7 tests
normally applied to
demonstrate that Just Cause did not exist, the grievant should
prevail and be
that such investigation must be fair and impartial were both not
met by the
Acting Chief and this was a serious act of misconduct and Just
Cause
4
The University cited at least 11 transcript references to
demonstrate the
for his actions on June 14, 2016 and July 14, 2016.
The PBA notified the university that the grievant was not to be
questioned
behalf of the grievant, Yet, this charge and the arbitration are
linked and no
exceeded all aspects of this rule urge for the termination of the
grievant. The
and the PBA asserts that 4 Articles of the CBA are relevant to
this matter.
the Acting Lieutenant and the Acting Chief of Police the grievant
was put
the Just Cause Standard and the clear terms of the CBA.
If any one of the tests is failed the just cause standard is not met
and the
would have been a witness and could not have led the
investigation as he
Further, the University never met the burden of proof that was
required
DISCUSSION:
This grievance arises from allegations by the PBA on behalf of the
grievant
police officer.
Determining the merits of the grievance the Seven Tests for Just
Cause
that investigation was fair and thorough, whether you relied upon
a policy
test as Counsel for the PBA presented. Many other authors set
out the fair
11
AWARD
The grievance is sustained. The grievant is reinstated,
retroactive to July 14, 2016 and the grievant should be
completely made whole for all lost wages, benefits and
emoluments lost due to his termination.
William J. Mc Ginnis, J
William J. Mc Ginnis, Jr.
FMCS Arbitrator
12