A dog handler with the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) should not be disciplined for giving the one-finger salute to a federal building, according to the federal labour board.
Correctional officer Glen Collison was disciplined by Correctional Service of Canada in 2019 for “giving the middle finger to a federal government building” and received a financial penalty of $285, which was the equivalent to one day’s pay.
According to the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board, Collison was sent to the Canada Border Services Agency’s training facility for a five-week recertification course with his new dog in July 2019. Collison was a correctional officer at the Millhaven Institution in Bath, Ont., but the Correctional Service of Canada does not do its own dog-handling certification.
The report says Collison did not enjoy his five-week training program. Shortly before his graduation day, Collison was speaking with three other people in the parking lot of Canada Border Service Agency building when he was asked whether he was glad to be leaving.
Collison said “yes,” and was then asked “what if they would not let him go home.”
“The grievor said that, of course, he could go home, but she again asked what if they would not let him,” the labour board report said.
“In response, the grievor turned away from the people in that conversation toward the CBSA kennel and gave it the middle finger; he then turned another direction (again, away from the people) and gave another building the middle finger.”
One of the people present in the parking lot informed a supervisor about the incident, and it was eventually escalated to the Canada Border Services Agency’s national headquarters, which raised it with CSC. Collison’s warden with the Correctional Service of Canada ordered an investigation and decided the incident warranted discipline.
“She imposed this discipline because she found that giving the CBSA’s buildings the middle finger was disrespectful,” the report said.
“He gave the finger to two buildings”
However, labour board adjudicator Christopher Rootham ruled that while Collison’s conduct “was puerile,” it was “not worthy of discipline.”
“If the grievor in this case had directed his middle finger toward anyone at the CBSA, I would have agreed with the CSC that doing so was discreditable behaviour warranting some amount of discipline,” Rootham wrote.
“He did not. He gave the finger to two buildings. As the grievor testified in cross-examination, buildings do not have opinions, and giving a building the finger is different from giving a person the finger.”
Rootham added, “His actions did not challenge the authority of his employer; they showed that he did not like the training facility and were a reaction to being needled about perhaps having to stay.”
The arbitrator also raised concerns with the investigation, saying it was “clear that someone at the CBSA exaggerated the grievor’s conduct so that the CBSA’s senior management was upset and passed its upset along to the CSC.”
“The CSC decided to punish the grievor, to appease the CBSA. Appeasing another department is not a valid reason to discipline an employee,” Rootham said, noting the warden had testified she disciplined Collison because she wanted to make sure that the CSC’s relationship with the CBSA was “not tarnished.”
Collison had told the arbitrator that the discipline should be set aside because of “procedural unfairness in the investigation,” including that he was given no notice of the allegations against him for six weeks before being informed that he was being investigated.
“It should be trite to say that in disciplinary investigations, the employee being investigated is entitled to know what they are being accused of before they are interviewed about it,” Rootham said.
The arbitrator ruled Collison should be reimbursed for the one days pay, with interest.
