Terminated for Possessing a Gun Emplover: City of New Haven, Connecticut Union:

Question

Terminated for Possessing a Gun Emplover: City of New Haven, Connecticut Union: American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Council 4, Local No. 3144 BACKGROUND Matthew Kress had been employed for 14 years by the Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA) in the city of New Haven. At the time of his discharge, he held the title of Wastewater Supervisor I, and he was assigned to the third shift (midnight to 8 AM) On May 8, 2009, WPCA had distributed to all employees a policy concerning weapons on the premises. It included the following: Effective immediately -No weapons of any sort shall be allowed on WPCA premises, including lockers and private vehicles parked on WPCA property. No exceptions shall be made to this policy. Anyone caught with a weapon on WPCA property in violation of this policy shall be subject to immediate discharge. Matthew Kress had received a copy of this policy and signed an acknowledgement for to that effect on May 15, 2009. On November 17, 2010, Kress brought a gun onto WPCA premises. Kress had a state permit to carry a weapon. He had previously stated that the neighborhood in which he lived had caused him to purchase and carry a gun for his personal safety. On November 17, he removed his gun from his briefcase and showed it to a co-worker. Two other employees later testified that they also saw the gun that night.

Explanation / Answer

1) Employer has every right to terminate the employee for violating the policy of the company. Also, any incident with the gun could be lethal and may kill innocent people. he has also made grave mistake by showing fully loaded gun to his co-workers.

2) Matthew kress's prior disciplinary record is also of major importance. he has repeatedly shown failure to perform duties, failure to follow orders and comply with organizational policies. Human being's behavior in work environment has been subject of study for more than decades. It is also observed that human being can act violantly towards work stress or if there is any conflict with colleagues or senior level. His past history shows that he actions were disregard for order and any altercation could have been flash point and in that case gun is lethal weapon.

3) There is no conflict between his right to carry weapon and organization's policy. He was permitted to carry gun because of his neighborhood which is high crime area. However, he had no such concerns or threats in the premises of the organization. Also, he had been introduced to the policy which he duly signed so there is little scope that he wasn't aware of no gun policy in the premises. He could have eaxplained his situation to the management but he made grave mistake by carrying it in and showing to co-workers.

4) Arbitration should terminate him because he has repeatedly shown disregard for organization's policies and work culture. Also, if the safety is the concern then he could have explained it to the management and could have found an ethical way out of it. However, he not only violated the law in case of rising gun related incidents but also displayed it to the co-workers. This is something serious.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.