Arbitration - 8 fired for Illegal Drug use rehired at Ont Nuke Plants -


Goober
#1
Arbitration - 8 fired for Illegal Drug use rehired at Ont Nuke Plants - Arbitrators ruling

Say a lot about binding arbitration now doesn't it. Does that make you feel safe.

Eight fired Ontario nuclear plant workers get their jobs back - The Globe and Mail

Eight of 11 workers who were fired from Ontario Power Generation’s Pickering nuclear station last month have been given their jobs back.

A provincial arbitrator’s decision released Dec. 23 reinstated eight of the workers who were fired in November after allegations of illegal drug use.

However, the decision wasn’t made public until a memo from OPG President and CEO Tom Mitchell to staff at the giant utility.

Because of the highly public nature of the dismissals and the challenge this event had on OPG’s well earned reputation, I want to let you know appropriate labour relations processes were followed and have now concluded,” Mr. Mitchell wrote.

The cases of the three who did not get their jobs back did not go to arbitration, and the arbitrator told OPG not to publicly release the names of the individuals involved or the information that was used during the hearing.

“What I can tell you is three individuals will not be returning to OPG,” wrote Mitchell.

“The arbitrator has reinstated the remaining eight employees with varying levels of discipline, which in some cases include significant restrictions.”

A spokesman said OPG could not speak to the specific discipline measures in this case, but “generally penalties can include suspensions, loss of pay and potentially demotions or other workplace restrictions.”

OPG called in police last month to investigate the allegations of drug use and a misuse of company resources by the workers, who were described as support and cleaning staff.

The utility has said all along that safety at the nuclear facility was never compromised, and no charges were ever laid by police.

The employees were reported to be using company computers to send emails about drug-related activities, but officially they were fired for violating OPG’s code of business conduct.

“When it comes to business ethics, each of us is accountable for doing the right thing,” said Mr. Mitchell.

“The code sets a standards for the way we work and the decisions we make, and it helps define our culture.”

And the Feds are just getting around to this now????????

Does not take a Rocket Scientist to figure this one out, now does it???Pressure growing for drug testing of nuclear plant staff - The Globe and Mail

Canada’s nuclear safety watchdog is developing policies that would require employees at power plants to be tested for drugs and alcohol.

The proposed heightened safety measures have been in the works for some time and will be released for public consultation next year. They come just as allegations of drug-related activities rock Ontario’s Crown-owned electricity utility. But they are not expected to be as stringent as those in the United States, where employees of nuclear power generating plants are subjected to mandatory, random testing.

In the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission introduced rules in 1989, requiring nuclear plant workers to be tested randomly to determine if they’ve been using alcohol or drugs. An employee who fails the test is suspended for at least 14 days. During that period, the plant operator must decide whether to fire the individual or refer him or her to a treatment program for substance abuse.

Canada has not followed the United States, despite recommendations of the Senate energy committee in 2001. In an interim report on safety at Canada’s nuclear reactors in 2001, the Senate committee called on the federal and Ontario governments to amend human rights legislation to allow drug and alcohol testing of employees in areas critical to public safety.
 
mentalfloss
#2
I'm sure it's not as bad as it seems, otherwise they wouldn't hire them back.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+1
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

I'm sure it's not as bad as it seems, otherwise they wouldn't hire them back.

It sounds like:
  • The arbitrator determined firing to be too hefty a pentaly
  • none of them work directly with critical equipment
  • they all face some sort of alternative discipline
 
petros
+3
#4  Top Rated Post
Sector 7 G
 
CDNBear
+2
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Sector 7 G

Hired/fired/rehired, under Project Bootstraps.
 
petros
+1
#6
 
taxslave
#7
So apparently some workers can be fired for using drugs at work and some can't. Now I don't know what the WCB rules are in Ontario but in B.C. if an employee is using drugs/ alcohol at work and the employer knows about it the employer will be at least partly at fault if there is an accident and will be fined. Now we have an unelected and untouchable government body compromising employers ability to ensure a safe worksite.
 
petros
#8
Depends on their contract.
 
JLM
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

So apparently some workers can be fired for using drugs at work and some can't. Now I don't know what the WCB rules are in Ontario but in B.C. if an employee is using drugs/ alcohol at work and the employer knows about it the employer will be at least partly at fault if there is an accident and will be fined. Now we have an unelected and untouchable government body compromising employers ability to ensure a safe worksite.

Years and years ago at Harmac mill an employee fell into a kiln (or something similar) and burned up. When his wife was informed of his demise, her biggest concern was that his thermos be brought home to her immediately.
 
Cannuck
#10
I don't know what all the hub-bub is about. According to the drug addicts I know (including those on this for forum), there is nothing wrong with drugs. In fact, most argue that it makes you better.
 
BruSan
+3
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

So apparently some workers can be fired for using drugs at work and some can't. Now I don't know what the WCB rules are in Ontario but in B.C. if an employee is using drugs/ alcohol at work and the employer knows about it the employer will be at least partly at fault if there is an accident and will be fined. Now we have an unelected and untouchable government body compromising employers ability to ensure a safe worksite.

Worker's Compensation Boards and Labour Relations Boards are two separate entities One deals with compensation for workplace derived injuries/disease. Other deals with Labour law infractions by either workers or employers.

Nope and nope to both! The rules as applied by the Labour Relations boards or their equivilants in both provinces are alike.

The rehiring would have come about due to not being able to substantiate a case against them with any evidence OTHER than the exchanged emails of "supposed" descriptions by themselves "supposedly" using drugs.

The other three did not have grievances filed on their behalf so the union was able to "refuse to file" through substantial evidence existant that precluded the threat of a section 60 (failure to represent) filing against it.

Here's my opinion from just reading that article: these idiots were trading emails, on company computers, about their getting bombed on some drug or other. These emails became public knowledge and company had to act. After a very brief investigation they found three employees under the influence or garnered other substantive proof to claim they were using drugs while on duty and elected on the basis of that to fire ALL mentioned in the emails.

Union is now faced with the conundrum of not wanting to but HAVING to file a grievance on behalf of those workers who were merely mentioned in the emails, even if written by they themsleves, as not having a proven case against them.

Here's the deal; for anyone who believes a union, ANY union has the luxury of making off the cuff decisions about who they defend or not; you're living in a 'fool's paradise' as I guarantee legal advice would have been sought and the lawyer consulted would have advised they file grievances on behalf of the eight while it would be a failed exercise for the three.

The fact the company is hiring them back without appealing the labour board's decision speaks volumes about the strength of their case going in.

Unions, by receiving a charter in ANY of the provinces in Canada are "obligated by law" to challenge any action by an employer that is contrary to the labour codes on behalf of ALL employees; yep, that's right mikey; EVEN SALARIED OR SUPERVISORY STAFF!

That little factomundo has come back to bite many union executive on the hiney when they've had a section 60 filed on them due to them either deciding not to process a greivance on behalf of someone who was a known troublemaking, A-hole or a summer student who was being told to climb a ladder without the proper training and subsequently injured themselves with both company and union being found responsible, and FINED! It is always about the merits of the case and nothing else.
Last edited by BruSan; Dec 29th, 2011 at 07:12 PM..
 
taxslave
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Years and years ago at Harmac mill an employee fell into a kiln (or something similar) and burned up. When his wife was informed of his demise, her biggest concern was that his thermos be brought home to her immediately.

The only one I recall would have been around 1981 or 2. It was a welder that was working inside a recovery boiler. He had a bic lighter in his pants pocket that leaked and started him on fire. Recovery boilers are only about 3 ft in Dia. and the door is about 16 in. He died before they could get him out. More from smoke inhalation than the injuries as I recall. Reason I remember is because I was working as a mechanic for M&B at the time and we banned disposable lighters from all the shops because of it. ****ty way to die.
 
JLM
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

The only one I recall would have been around 1981 or 2. It was a welder that was working inside a recovery boiler. He had a bic lighter in his pants pocket that leaked and started him on fire. Recovery boilers are only about 3 ft in Dia. and the door is about 16 in. He died before they could get him out. More from smoke inhalation than the injuries as I recall. Reason I remember is because I was working as a mechanic for M&B at the time and we banned disposable lighters from all the shops because of it. ****ty way to die.

Before that, a person I knew in Sayward was telling me that story in the Salmon River Hotel about 1970.
 
taxslave
+3
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Before that, a person I knew in Sayward was telling me that story in the Salmon River Hotel about 1970.

Can't remember that far back. Actually can't remember much of the 70s. Dr. Hook even wrote a song about it.
 
BruSan
#15
All unions have access to and should subscribe to the Labour Law Review that sends out published arbitration cases with decisions reached and reasons for them on a semi annual basis.

Reading them would curl your hair at the stupidity of some in our labour workforce as well as the absolute retardation of some companie's mangement when it comes to these issues.
 
petros
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Can't remember that far back. Actually can't remember much of the 70s. Dr. Hook even wrote a song about it.

Is he still accepting patients?

Quote: Originally Posted by BruSanView Post

All unions have access to and should subscribe to the Labour Law Review that sends out published arbitration cases with decisions reached and reasons for them on a semi annual basis.

Reading them would curl your hair at the stupidity of some in our labour workforce as well as the absolute retardation of some companie's mangement when it comes to these issues.

These days any infraction and you're gone from a job for safety issues even if it is putting gloves on after you exited a port-a-potty. You get two warnings your first one is given at orientation and the next you're off site.
 
TenPenny
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Recovery boilers are only about 3 ft in Dia. and the door is about 16 in.

Most of the recovery boilers I've worked on are about 50 to 100 ft square, by 8 or 9 stories high.

I would have to guess that you are referring to the steam drum, or one of the related exchangers.
 
BruSan
#18
We used to call them "mud drums" on the old Babcock Wilcox of my naval days and only the little dockyard welders were selected for going in there.

The other candidates for entry into those drums were OD's performing their OJT and tasked with raking out the sludge that collected there.
 
Ariadne
+1
#19
Does anyone else think Homer Simpson when reading about drugged up people running nuclear plants?
 
Cliffy
#20
I'm glad they are all back east. None in BC. Although some not too far away in the US. I guess there is no way to escape that insanity.
 
bill barilko
#21
They weren't caught smoking dope on the job just talking about smoking dope.

Quote:

The employees were reported to be using company computers to send emails about drug-related activities

 
JLM
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

I'm glad they are all back east. None in BC. Although some not too far away in the US. I guess there is no way to escape that insanity.

Their safety record is probably better than the average knitting factory!
 
Ariadne
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by bill barilkoView Post

They weren't caught smoking dope on the job just talking about smoking dope.

Kinda like talking about watching porn but not watching porn ... I guess, except that watching porn isn't illegal but smoking dope is. It must be okay to talk about watching porn while pulling a Homer Simpson at the nuclear plant.
 
SLM
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Their safety record is probably better than the average knitting factory!

I would freaking hope so!
 
JLM
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

I would freaking hope so!

I suppose when you look at it that way!
 
SLM
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I suppose when you look at it that way!

I'm only about two hours away from the Bruce Power Plant, maybe not even that.

So, yeah, I look at it that way, lol.
 
JLM
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

I'm only about two hours away from the Bruce Power Plant, maybe not even that.

So, yeah, I look at it that way, lol.

I'm about 4 hours away from one in Washington State. Still the safest source of energy!
 
SLM
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I'm about 4 hours away from one in Washington State. Still the safest source of energy!

I don't argue that at all. It's when they take a "lets wait and see" attitude when it comes to dealing with the waste by-product that I get nervous, lol.
 
JLM
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

I don't argue that at all. It's when they take a "lets wait and see" attitude when it comes to dealing with the waste by-product that I get nervous, lol.

For good cause!
 
CDNBear
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

I don't argue that at all. It's when they take a "lets wait and see" attitude when it comes to dealing with the waste by-product that I get nervous, lol.

Oh hell, just dump it in the caves at Kelso.
 

Similar Threads

94
Put an end to illegal drug use?
by JLM | Jun 3rd, 2010
no new posts