Now THIS is how you complain.

[turbodish]

Forum Sponsor

No Jai,l but fired immediatly no bs paid vacation.

That's hard to do these days regardless of occupation. Alcoholism is considered to be a form of disability and the employer has a duty to accomodate while the employee seeks treatment. http://ofl.ca/uploads/library/disability_issues/ACCOMMODATION.pdf

Alcoholism has been commonly cited in the human rights and arbitration caselaw as a disability, and deserving of an accommodation. In general, the duty requires employers to permit employees with an alcohol abuse problem the opportunity to address their problem through rehabilitation and abstention programs. However, where an employer has extended several chances to an employee to tackle his drinking problem, and the employee has dropped out of the rehab centres and shown no real appreciation of the depth of his problem, the employer’s accommodation duty will have been satisfied.

In Re Uniroyal Goodrich Canada Inc., Arbitrator Knopf stated that alcoholism is a chronic disease that, while not curable, is certainly treated. Therefore, the issue is not blame and punishment, but whether (i) the employee has been given a reasonable opportunity to successfully deal with the alcoholism and (ii) the employer’s legitimate contractual expectations have been met. This requires examining whether (a) the grievor’s past record, and (b) his or her future prognosis indicates that a viable employment relationship can be reestablished.

On the evidence of this case, the Arbitrator found that the employer had gone to great lengths to accommodate the grievor, and he showed no substantive indication of past or future success.

This guy apparently has a long history of exemplary service. Unless this guy also has a documented history of showing up drunk (and the professional standards investigation will deal with that), a summary firing could end up being quite expensive for TPS if the cop were to file a wrongful dismissal suit.

In any case, it doesn't look like it will ever get to that. This cop has been on the force long enough that he can simply take retirement now instead of waiting for another year or three from now.

 

[Scuba Steve]

No actually it is easy if you show up drunk. You can only claim alcoholism as a disability before being fired not after.

 

[turbodish]

No actually it is easy if you show up drunk. You can only claim alcoholism as a disability before being fired not after.

Case law and prior arbitration rulings would disagree that firing will be automatically upheld simply for an isolated (and in some cases even repeated) case(s) of showing up at work drunk.
http://canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2012/2012canlii453/2012canlii453.pdf
http://canlii.org/en/qc/qcdag/doc/2002/2002canlii13840/2002canlii13840.pdf
http://canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2011/2011canlii73195/2011canlii73195.pdf
http://canlii.org/en/ca/pssrb/doc/2003/2003pssrb72/2003pssrb72.pdf

 

[braveheart]

Turbo ... why is it, that no matter what the problem seems to be, you find a way to back up the cops , and try to screw everyone else ?

why cant you ever say " yeah, that cop was a total tool, and deserves to be fired "

Im not anti-cop, and im not Pro-citizen, but there are certain instances where people have to be dealt with.

whats the deal ? why cant you see it like everyone else ? if a cop turned out to be a serial killer, you'd probably make an excuse to make it not his fault somehow.

 

[Shaman]

This guy apparently has a long history of exemplary service. Unless this guy also has a documented history of showing up drunk (and the professional standards investigation will deal with that), a summary firing could end up being quite expensive for TPS if the cop were to file a wrongful dismissal suit.

What you mean is that he and his blue vested goon buddies did a great job of hiding their shortcomings but got arrogant enough to push the limits, and got caught. That's what usually happens. And personally I'd rather they fire the guy and deal with the backlash - you know the public would be behind a judge telling him to live with the shame and get bent.

Or maybe you don't, in turbo-world.

 

[LGdrama]

In the "corporate world" it's socially ok to have a drink with lunch or at a lunch meeting.
For this desk cop, it's not ok? He had no gun & wouldnt be firing one. Whats the issue? Maybe he did only have one drink - no one gave him a breathalyzer to determine his BAC - so bottom line is that his subordinates "ratted" on him.
Innocent till proven guilty.

 

[LGdrama]

if a cop turned out to be a serial killer, you'd probably make an excuse to make it not his fault somehow.

haha. Did he defend Russell Williams?

 

[geoff-9]

In the "corporate world" it's socially ok to have a drink with lunch or at a lunch meeting.
For this desk cop, it's not ok? He had no gun & wouldnt be firing one. Whats the issue? Maybe he did only have one drink - no one gave him a breathalyzer to determine his BAC - so bottom line is that his subordinates "ratted" on him.
Innocent till proven guilty.

somebody with some sense!

 

[CruisnGrrl]

showing up drunk to a police station.. wouldn't that be public intoxication?

 

[CruisnGrrl]

In the "corporate world" it's socially ok to have a drink with lunch or at a lunch meeting.
For this desk cop, it's not ok? He had no gun & wouldnt be firing one. Whats the issue? Maybe he did only have one drink - no one gave him a breathalyzer to determine his BAC - so bottom line is that his subordinates "ratted" on him.
Innocent till proven guilty.

actually at my work place going for a drink on lunch is not allowed, showing up after drinking before work isn't allowed either. drinking on premises isn't allowed either... I don't believe i've ever worked some where where drinking on a break is acceptable.

 

[LGdrama]

showing up drunk to a police station.. wouldn't that be public intoxication?

Define drunk.
Define "alcohol on his breath".

actually at my work place going for a drink on lunch is not allowed, showing up after drinking before work isn't allowed either. drinking on premises isn't allowed either... I don't believe i've ever worked some where where drinking on a break is acceptable.

There are surprisingly a lot of offices/companies that allow it to be "socially acceptable". Take sales for example : taking a client out for lunch to close a deal & have a drink to toast the closing.

 

[CruisnGrrl]

Define drunk.
Define "alcohol on his breath".

I don't have to, looks like his subordinates deemed he was too drunk to work

The senior officer in charge of Toronto’s RIDE program was sent home Friday morning after subordinates smelled alcohol on his breath and noticed him appearing impaired

I would equate appearing impaired and smelling of booze as drunk. they should have had him do a Breathalyzer test, then that would have removed all question, i suspect he wasn't given one as that would really have answered questions, how ever to be charged with public intoxication you do not have to blow into a breathalyzer nor if you did would you have to hit a particular blood alcohol level.

 

[FullMotoJacket]

haha. Did he defend Russell Williams?

When did Russel Williams quit the Air Force and become a cop? I must have missed that memo.

Proofreading. It works.

 

[turbodish]

they should have had him do a Breathalyzer test, then that would have removed all question, i suspect he wasn't given one as that would really have answered questions, how ever to be charged with public intoxication you do not have to blow into a breathalyzer nor if you did would you have to hit a particular blood alcohol level.

You suspect wrong. He wasn't given a breathalyzer for the same reason that anyone else showing up drunk at an office isn't given one - there are no legal grounds on which police can demand a breat sample from someone not sitting behind the wheel of a motor vehicle.

Public intoxication is not a criminal charge, and it applies only to being intoxicated in a public place. A private office is not a public place even if it is in a police station or other government building. Even in a public place, there is nothing in the POA that would required a person being charged with public intoxication to provide a breathalyzer sample.

 

[turbodish]

showing up drunk to a police station.. wouldn't that be public intoxication?

Not necessarily. The general public generally doesn't get free invited access to most parts of a police station. The only place that would be considered a public place would be the front door and counter area. A pivate police employee entrance is not a public place. Private office or police-only work and meeting areas is not a public place.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Not necessarily. The general public generally doesn't get free invited access to most parts of a police station. The only place that would be considered a public place would be the front door and counter area. A pivate police employee entrance is not a public place. Private office or police-only work and meeting areas is not a public place.

But public transit, the general police parking area, or the sidewalk could be considered such. I am led to wonder how, exactly, he got to work on that day.

 

[turbodish]

Turbo ... why is it, that no matter what the problem seems to be, you find a way to back up the cops , and try to screw everyone else ?

why cant you ever say " yeah, that cop was a total tool, and deserves to be fired "

Because that wasn't what I was addressing. What I was addressing was whether or not he (or many other people in the same situation regardless of job title, cop or not) could be easily fired, not whether or not he should be. Notice the subtle and not so subtle differences?

Im not anti-cop, and im not Pro-citizen, but there are certain instances where people have to be dealt with.
whats the deal ? why cant you see it like everyone else ?

Yes there are certain situations where people have to be dealt with, and so he is through a professional standards branch investigation. But try as you might, it doesn't sound like this cop committed any criminal act. It's questionable whether he committed a POA act. So where is the basis of charging him? That's not defending the cop's actions. That's just looking at the situation for what it is, and not looking at it as a convenient excuse to pull out the knives for summary execution.

if a cop turned out to be a serial killer, you'd probably make an excuse to make it not his fault somehow.

I see that you haven't read my posts in past. I've clearly stated that cops who commit criminal acts should be prosecuted and punished same as anyone else. I think that cops who are charged with corruption or serious criminal activity shouldn't be allow to remain as cops if convicted, and think it's good that the Police Act does give a chance of second-level prosecution and removal of such cops even if they manage to avoid conviction in regular CC proceedings.

 

[turbodish]

But public transit, the general police parking area, or the sidewalk could be considered such. I am led to wonder how, exactly, he got to work on that day.

Those places could be considered public places, but is there any evidence that he was intoxicated in those places?

Try this at home kids. Drink half a 26er of rum in one or two gulps. Do you smell of booze? Definately. Are you immediately intoxicated? Not necessarily. It can take a while for the alcohol to actually have an effect. You might be able to walk to the corner store before showing any signs of impairment.

Also, even when the booze starts to hit, simply being tipsy is seldom grounds for a public intoxication charge. The intoxication generally has to be fairly gross before anyone is hit with that, to the point where they have become a danger to themselves or a serious nuisance to others in the public place. Was this cop THAT drunk? Or, given that he was in a police station where having an odour of alcohol and/or even mild signs of impairment would stand out, was he dealt with because of there being a rightfully greater concern about a cop in uniform having even the slightest odour of alcohol about him?

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Those places could be considered public places, but is there any evidence that he was intoxicated in those places?

Try this at home kids. Drink half a 26er of rum in one or two gulps. Do you smell of booze? Definately. Are you immediately intoxicated? Not necessarily. It can take a while for the alcohol to actually have an effect. You might be able to walk to the corner store before showing any signs of impairment.

Also, even when the booze starts to hit, simply being tipsy is seldom grounds for a public intoxication charge. The intoxication generally has to be fairly gross before anyone is hit with that, to the point where they have become a danger to themselves or a serious nuisance to others in the public place. Was this cop THAT drunk? Or, given that he was in a police station where having an odour of alcohol and/or even mild signs of impairment would stand out, was he dealt with because of there being a rightfully greater concern about a cop in uniform having even the slightest odour of alcohol about him?

So are you saying that he tossed back a 26er in the hallway, then was inebriated by the time he reached his desk? In the parking lot? On the subway or in his car, on the way to work? That rather beggars credulity, no? As I said, he got there somehow.

 

[turbodish]

So are you saying that he tossed back a 26er in the hallway, then was inebriated by the time he reached his desk? In the parking lot? On the subway or in his car, on the way to work? That rather beggars credulity, no? As I said, he got there somehow.

Not saying any of that. Just saying that we don't know how far he lives from his work or from where he had his last drink. Not everyone commutes in from a different town. Some people live within a very short walking distance or a cab ride from work. Again, how long does it take for the effects of alcohol to kick in, if alcohol and not some other condition (diabetic ketoacidosis?) was in play?

We also don't know how severe the apparent impairment was at the station. We do know that ANY smell of alcohol or sign of impairment by any cause would be noticed more quickly and vividly in a police station than it might in a more public environment. As a result, we don't know if his displayed impairment would have been sufficient to warrant LLA charges of public intoxication even had he been observed in "a public place".

Forum Sponsor