Pink sticky note cited as source of irritation by patient
After an interaction with an elderly cancer patient and her daughter went poorly, an intake clerk was fired for “failing to communicate in a respectful manner with patients and failing to maintain a professional and calm demeanour in her verbal and non-verbal communications.”
Fatiha Kara began working at the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in 2006 and was transferred to the radiation therapy department (RTD) in 2015 as a booking clerk.
On Nov. 3, 2017, manager Cynthia Stulp was advised by two staff members about a negative patient interaction earlier in the day. A 74-year-old patient and her daughter were told by Kara that an appointment time was changed.
The patient said she would have trouble making the appointment because it was early in the morning. Kara told the women that they could attempt to get an appointment changed but they would have to make a phone call themselves. She attached a pink sticky note on the appointment paper and included the names and numbers of two staff members who might be able to help them.
“(The daughter) said the lady at the front desk was very abrupt and rude and told them that the times are as is and can’t be changed (and) the sticker is there. She said her mother walked away in tears and was very upset,” said Kulwant Virk, a booking clerk who was on duty at the same time.
The patient and her daughter were interviewed on Nov. 20 about the interaction.
“She was loud, people standing behind us. Quite loud. Forceful, just kept pushing and pushing when my daughter was saying thank you,” said the patient, according to notes in the investigation report.
The pink sticker and Kara’s reminders about it were noted repeatedly as a source of irritation by both the patient and her daughter.
On Nov. 24, Kara was interviewed about the encounter. She said she tried to contact two supervisors to get the appointments sorted out but could not reach them.
Kara then gave the appointment paper to the patient and her daughter with the pink sticky note that said appointment times could be changed at any time.
“I don’t insist, I just state that we have this sticker just as a reminder. I don’t go over and over and keep repeating, no. When you do that it would upset the (patient) more,” said Kara in a summary report issued on Dec. 5.
Five previous disciplinary actions (including an eight-day suspension) were cited in Kara’s termination letter by the employer. “During your interactions with the patient and her daughter regarding the time of the patient’s next treatment, your conduct was inappropriate and unprofessional. They described it as ‘upsetting,’ ‘abrupt,’ ‘forceful’ and ‘ruthless,’” said the letter of dismissal.
The Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) grieved the termination and argued that the patient and her daughter’s testimony cannot be relied upon because they didn’t testify at the hearing.
Arbitrator Lyle Kanee agreed. “I have concluded that it would be unfair to rely upon the hearsay evidence of the patient and her daughter without giving the union the opportunity to cross-examine them. I have also found that there is otherwise insufficient evidence to find just cause for discipline of the grievor and, accordingly, the union’s grievance is upheld.”
However, Kara’s well-known behaviour was cited as a possible reason for a dismissal being successful in the future, said Kanee.
“(Kara’s) direct style of communication has not served her well during the four years since she transferred into the RTD. It is also obvious from the testimony of her managers and her own testimony that she has little insight and does not accept that her style of communication is a concern or in need of improvement. If she returns to this position with this attitude, it may be that she will face discipline again and this decision will have only delayed a further reckoning. Perhaps another option would be worthy of consideration,” said Kanee
Reference: Alberta Health Services and Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. Lyle Kanee — arbitrator. Joel Michaud, Tessa Gregson for the employer. Angela Gill, Karen Thibault for the employee. May 1, 2019.
Fatiha Kara began working at the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in 2006 and was transferred to the radiation therapy department (RTD) in 2015 as a booking clerk.
On Nov. 3, 2017, manager Cynthia Stulp was advised by two staff members about a negative patient interaction earlier in the day. A 74-year-old patient and her daughter were told by Kara that an appointment time was changed.
The patient said she would have trouble making the appointment because it was early in the morning. Kara told the women that they could attempt to get an appointment changed but they would have to make a phone call themselves. She attached a pink sticky note on the appointment paper and included the names and numbers of two staff members who might be able to help them.
“(The daughter) said the lady at the front desk was very abrupt and rude and told them that the times are as is and can’t be changed (and) the sticker is there. She said her mother walked away in tears and was very upset,” said Kulwant Virk, a booking clerk who was on duty at the same time.
The patient and her daughter were interviewed on Nov. 20 about the interaction.
“She was loud, people standing behind us. Quite loud. Forceful, just kept pushing and pushing when my daughter was saying thank you,” said the patient, according to notes in the investigation report.
The pink sticker and Kara’s reminders about it were noted repeatedly as a source of irritation by both the patient and her daughter.
On Nov. 24, Kara was interviewed about the encounter. She said she tried to contact two supervisors to get the appointments sorted out but could not reach them.
Kara then gave the appointment paper to the patient and her daughter with the pink sticky note that said appointment times could be changed at any time.
“I don’t insist, I just state that we have this sticker just as a reminder. I don’t go over and over and keep repeating, no. When you do that it would upset the (patient) more,” said Kara in a summary report issued on Dec. 5.
Five previous disciplinary actions (including an eight-day suspension) were cited in Kara’s termination letter by the employer. “During your interactions with the patient and her daughter regarding the time of the patient’s next treatment, your conduct was inappropriate and unprofessional. They described it as ‘upsetting,’ ‘abrupt,’ ‘forceful’ and ‘ruthless,’” said the letter of dismissal.
The Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) grieved the termination and argued that the patient and her daughter’s testimony cannot be relied upon because they didn’t testify at the hearing.
Arbitrator Lyle Kanee agreed. “I have concluded that it would be unfair to rely upon the hearsay evidence of the patient and her daughter without giving the union the opportunity to cross-examine them. I have also found that there is otherwise insufficient evidence to find just cause for discipline of the grievor and, accordingly, the union’s grievance is upheld.”
However, Kara’s well-known behaviour was cited as a possible reason for a dismissal being successful in the future, said Kanee.
“(Kara’s) direct style of communication has not served her well during the four years since she transferred into the RTD. It is also obvious from the testimony of her managers and her own testimony that she has little insight and does not accept that her style of communication is a concern or in need of improvement. If she returns to this position with this attitude, it may be that she will face discipline again and this decision will have only delayed a further reckoning. Perhaps another option would be worthy of consideration,” said Kanee
Reference: Alberta Health Services and Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. Lyle Kanee — arbitrator. Joel Michaud, Tessa Gregson for the employer. Angela Gill, Karen Thibault for the employee. May 1, 2019.
