You are on page 1of 8

1

Running header: CASE #13.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT

Case13.2, Discharge of Postal Letter Carrier for Off-Duty Conduct Employee and Labor Relations- HRM 534 September 2, 2011

CASE #13.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT Abstract

2 Management has the power to discipline for misconduct directly related to employment. render your decision. Nexus is the key work. indictments. However discipline is the action taken by HR management against an individual or group who has failed to follow the established rules and procedures within an organization. Thirdly. and convictions. This paper will discuss the principle of Nexus and how it applies in this case of off-duty misconduct. Secondly. Explain the reasoning behind your decision. who has weighed the evidence. and which party bears eh burden of proof. discuss Mr.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT According to Mathis (2010) arbitrators have been reluctant to sustain discipline for off-duty misconduct unless the is some nexus or connection to the job. Lastly. Allen is a public sector employee and how does this differentiate the case from the private sector. as the arbitrator. considered the necessary levels of proof. CASE #13. we will distinguish between arrests. This is the .

2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT employee incarceration. and if the other employees refuse to work with the employee in question. In determining whether or not there is a connection between the misconduct and employment. unavailability of the CASE #13. In this case of off-duty misconduct. there is a significant when it is established that the employees misconduct off-the premises has a detrimental effect on the employers reputation or product or when the off-duty misconduct leads to the refusal or reluctance or inability of other employees to work with the employee on the job. Explain the principle of Nexus and how it applies in this case of off-duty misconduct. 2010). The arbitrator must decide whether or not the behavior will harm the employer’s reputation. Jennings. & Jackson. and whether or not other employees will refuse or have difficulty working with the accused employee. and convictions. impact of the grievant reinstatement on fellow employees. . if the behavior will directly affect products and/or production. Distinguish between arrests. Nexus is the connection between off-duty misconduct and how it affects employment (Holley. if the crimes will have a detrimental effect on USPS’ service and reputation. a number of questions must be answered. Wolters. The criteria traditionally considered by arbitrators belong in four categories: damage to the employers business or reputation. the arbitrator must determine if the alleged crimes of arson and burglary affected the employee’s ability to perform his job.3 traditional rule: While generally the employee’s conduct away from the place of business is viewed as none of eh employers business. the unsuitability of continued employment in light of the misconduct. if the behavior will prevent the employee from completing his/her job duties. Mathis. indictments. who refuse to work with or be exposed to danger by the off-duty offender.

a prosecutor presents the case and related evidence to a judge or grand jury. Public sector employers are more likely to discipline their employees for the misconduct than their private sector counterparts for the same offense. who has weighed the evidence. such as teachers. How does this differentiate the case from the private sector? In both the private and public sectors. A final judgment is handed down after all the court proceedings and deliberations have been completed. an indictment (a formal written statement) is presented to the accused person by the grand jury demonstrating there is enough evidence against the accused person to be prosecuted in court. After an arrest. If there is sufficient evidence against the accused person.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT behind your decision. employers can discipline or discharge employees for off-duty misconduct. and working relationships with other employees. render your decision. considered the necessary levels of proof. Allen is a public sector employee.4 An arrest occurs when a person has been apprehended and is taken into custody by the police or other legal authority. . and firefighters. especially from those who come in direct contact with the public every day. and the criminal is handed the imposed punishment for the crime. A final judgment of guilty against a person in a case is a conviction. however. Explain the reasoning CASE #13. police officers. and which party bears the burden of proof. As the arbitrator. productivity. Mr. Employers typically must prove if and how the off-duty conduct affects the business. Public employers. are more critical of off-duty misconduct.

the Postal Service has the right to remove Mr.5 As arbitrator for the Postal Service and Mr. Allen from a pay status. Allen was indicted on charges that can carry up to 220 years imprisonment. p. the Postal Service was unable to show how Mr. Allen’s actions had a negative effect on the Postal Service’s operations or reputation.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT . the advance notice requirement shall not apply and such an employee may be immediately removed from a pay status” (Holley. Allen’s immediate supervisor testified he would not have terminated Allen’s employment if given the choice. However. The Postal Service agreed that if the indictment is dropped or Allen is acquitted. Allen has not been convicted of a crime. Allen. the owners have agreed to accept the replacement of the hunting cabin as restitution for burning it down. Mr. I find in favor of Mr. In Article 16 of the Agreement. Allen. Allen and grant his requested grievance. The owner of the cabin did not press charges against Mr. Allen is guilty due to the fact he agreed to rebuild the cabin that was burned down. al. it states. et. 613). Mr. 2010. Mr. Although Mr. “When there is reasonable cause to believe an employee is guilty of a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment can be imposed. In the months after the indictment. Allen has worked effectively and he has not affected the work performance of his coworkers in the ten months prior to the indictment. but not terminate his employment. any reasonable person would believe Mr. he would be returned to work immediately. There CASE #13. Based on this alone. and she believed that he should not lose his job.

13.2 DISCHARGE OF POSTAL LETTER CARRIER FOR OFF-DUTY CONDUCT . Even the Mayor of the town wanted to see Mr. and there was community support for Mr. I recommend Mr.6 was no evidence of his coworkers not wanting to work with him. Based on all the information presented in the case. Allen return to his duties. Allen to continue with his mail route. Allen be reinstated to his position and be compensated for all lost wages and benefits retroactive to the date of termination.

R. Mathis. Jackson. R. (2010).. OH. (2010) Employment and labor relations. R. Ohio: Cengage Learning. L.7 References Holley. The labor relations: 2010 custom edition.. Mathis. . J. K. S. & Wolters. H. Jennings. M. J. H.. Mason. W.

8 .