 |
Arbitration Case: Discharge Of Peter Seichek
|
Below is one of our free research papers on Arbitration Case: Discharge Of Peter Seichek. If the term paper below is not exactly what you're looking for, you can search our essay database for other topics.
Arbitration Case: Discharge of Peter Seichek
Closing Statement Mr. Arbitrator, the termination of the employment of Mr. Seichek, by the Wheelwright Corporation, was for his "sleeping on the job". Lets examine this stated reason - in the light of the evidence provided by witness testimony and contained within Mr. Seichek's personnel record. 1) Mr. Holloday testified that he and Mr. White, the third shift supervisor, observed Mr. Seichek, wearing his welding hood, sitting or leaning against the ladder, "apparently" asleep. Further, Mr. Holloday stated that he called to Mr. Seichek six or seven times to get his attention. Mr. Seichek was then directed to accompany Mr. Holloday and Mr. White to the office. In the office, Mr. Holloday told Mr. Seichek that he had been caught sleeping before, and that his absenteeism was excessive, and therefore was being suspended. Mr. Arbitrator, they found Mr. Seichek at his work station, wearing his protective clothing, waiting for a co-worker to return with needed parts, in order to continue the job. With the welding hood on, they could not positively determine that he was asleep, and six or seven calls to get his attention in the noisy, factory atmosphere is not extreme. In reference to having been caught sleeping before, Mr. Holloday, testified that on August 16,1982, that he found Mr. Seichek asleep in the reception area and on August 17, he was found asleep on a tool box near the time clock. In both instances, Mr. Holloday...
|