A BC labour arbitrator has ruled that a workplace comment about killing a supervisor, while serious misconduct, does not automatically justify dismissal, ordering a veteran cleaning employee reinstated after serving a four-month unpaid suspension.The decision overturns the dismissal of Paramjit Grewal, a 60-year-old janitor who spent 26 years with North Vancouver-based Servantage Services Corporation before she was fired last Dec. 10 following a disciplinary meeting.Blacklock's Reporter says labour arbitrator Amanda Rogers concluded Grewal's comment warranted significant discipline but found the employer failed to establish that dismissal was justified after considering all the circumstances."Threatening to kill a supervisor at work is unacceptable," Rogers wrote in her decision. However, she added that an employer's zero-tolerance workplace violence policy does not eliminate an arbitrator's obligation to examine whether termination is appropriate based on the facts of each case.The incident stemmed from a disagreement between Grewal and a co-worker over an elevator door. During a subsequent disciplinary meeting, Grewal became upset after feeling she was not given an opportunity to explain her side of the dispute.Evidence showed she then muttered in Punjabi that she could kill her supervisor.Witnesses disagreed over the exact wording. One testified Grewal used the Punjabi word for "pistol," while others disputed that account..Servantage argued the statement amounted to a straightforward death threat directed at a supervisor following a contentious disciplinary meeting. Grewal's union, Unifor Local 3000, characterized it instead as an emotional outburst made in the heat of the moment.Rogers noted Grewal immediately acknowledged making the statement, apologized and sought forgiveness rather than attempting to deny or conceal what she had said.The arbitrator also questioned the employer's response to what it described as a serious threat. The company did not notify police or security following the incident."There was no explanation as to why police were not called if the grievor's statement was viewed as a serious threat," Rogers wrote.In assessing the appropriate penalty, Rogers pointed to Grewal's 26 years of service without any history of violence or previous threats, concluding she posed little ongoing risk in the workplace and had strong potential for rehabilitation.Unlike many cases where dismissal has been upheld, Rogers also found Grewal had been truthful about her conduct from the outset.The arbitrator substituted the dismissal with a four-month suspension without pay, allowing Grewal to return to her job after serving the unpaid disciplinary period.
