Airport employee claimed he thought it was a co-worker's, not a passenger's
An employee for a passenger and baggage screening services company who was fired after he allegedly stole a bottle of mouthwash shouldn’t have been terminated, the Ontario Arbitration Board has ruled.
In 2006, Canadian airports imposed restrictions on passengers carrying more than 150 ml of gels and liquids in carry-on luggage. At the airport in London, Ont., Aeroguard Eastern Ltd. is charged with storing items confiscated from passengers. The items are put in a temporary container and stored in a cabinet in a supervisor’s office. They are then categorized and recorded, then taken away by the fire department. Employees are not allowed to use or take possession of any confiscated items.
In November 2006, Colin Squires, an Aeroguard screening officer, was observed by the site manager removing a bottle of mouthwash from the cabinet and putting it in his pocket. The manager reported it to the interim acting site manager, who said the action constituted theft. Squires was subsequently terminated.
Squires later testified he thought the mouthwash belonged to a co-worker and merely removed it from a shelf in the cabinet, not from the container of confiscated items. He also said he later placed it on a table to be reclaimed.
The board found Aeroguard acted too quickly and harshly by accusing Squires of theft without further proof and firing him without an investigation.
“The burden on the company is to establish on a balance of probabilities that Mr. Squires committed theft,” he board said. “The evidence of theft in this case is anything but clear, strong and cogent.”
Showing Squires possessed something that didn’t belong to him was not enough. “To make out an allegation of theft, it is necessary to prove a dishonest intent,” the board said.
Accusing an employee of theft is an extremely serious allegation, added the board, especially when the individual’s position requires a high degree of trust. Where such misconduct is alleged, the conduct must be scrutinized with greater care.
The board ordered Squires to be reinstated to his position with compensation for any loss of earnings since his termination. See Aeroguard Eastern Ltd. v. Teamsters, Local 847, 2007 CarswellOnt1896 (Ont. Arb. Bd.).
In 2006, Canadian airports imposed restrictions on passengers carrying more than 150 ml of gels and liquids in carry-on luggage. At the airport in London, Ont., Aeroguard Eastern Ltd. is charged with storing items confiscated from passengers. The items are put in a temporary container and stored in a cabinet in a supervisor’s office. They are then categorized and recorded, then taken away by the fire department. Employees are not allowed to use or take possession of any confiscated items.
In November 2006, Colin Squires, an Aeroguard screening officer, was observed by the site manager removing a bottle of mouthwash from the cabinet and putting it in his pocket. The manager reported it to the interim acting site manager, who said the action constituted theft. Squires was subsequently terminated.
Squires later testified he thought the mouthwash belonged to a co-worker and merely removed it from a shelf in the cabinet, not from the container of confiscated items. He also said he later placed it on a table to be reclaimed.
The board found Aeroguard acted too quickly and harshly by accusing Squires of theft without further proof and firing him without an investigation.
“The burden on the company is to establish on a balance of probabilities that Mr. Squires committed theft,” he board said. “The evidence of theft in this case is anything but clear, strong and cogent.”
Showing Squires possessed something that didn’t belong to him was not enough. “To make out an allegation of theft, it is necessary to prove a dishonest intent,” the board said.
Accusing an employee of theft is an extremely serious allegation, added the board, especially when the individual’s position requires a high degree of trust. Where such misconduct is alleged, the conduct must be scrutinized with greater care.
The board ordered Squires to be reinstated to his position with compensation for any loss of earnings since his termination. See Aeroguard Eastern Ltd. v. Teamsters, Local 847, 2007 CarswellOnt1896 (Ont. Arb. Bd.).
