Ocb Award Number: 1990

OCB AWARD NUMBER: 2072

SUBJECT: ARB SUMMARY # 2072 TO: ALL ADVOCATES FROM: KRISTEN RANKIN OCB GRIEVANCE NUMBER: 15-03-20091013-0135-04-01 DEPARTMENT: Ohio Department of Public Safety UNION: OSTA ARBITRATOR: E. William Lewis GRIEVANT NAME: Lia C. Black (Heidel) MANAGEMENT ADVOCATE: Kevin S. Miller 2ND CHAIR: Marissa Hartley UNION ADVOCATE: Herschel M. Sigall ARBITRATION DATE: January 27, 2010 DECISION DATE: March 11, 2010 DECISION: DENIED CONTRACT SECTIONS: Articles 19.01 and 19.05 OCB RESEARCH CODES: 118.01 – Discipline-In General; 118.01 – Dishonesty-In General; 118.646 – Discourtesy to Public; 118.6484 – Falsification of Records

HOLDING: Grievance DENIED. The Arbitrator found that there was just cause to remove the Grievant.

The Grievant was employed as a Trooper for the Ohio State Highway Patrol. On July 11, 2009, the Grievant observed a vehicle passing her residence at an alleged high rate of speed. At that time, the Grievant was leaving her residence to report to work. The Grievant pursued the vehicle and issued the driver a citation for excessive speed. Later that day, the driver filed a complaint against the Grievant alleging that the Grievant estimated his speed without using a radar gun. The Employer investigated the driver’s allegation and determined that the Grievant improperly issued the speeding citation. Further, the Employer determined that the Grievant falsely indicated on the citation that she checked the driver’s speed using a radar gun. Consequently, on October 9, 2009, the Employer removed the Grievant. At the time of her removal, the Grievant had worked for the Employer for nine years.

The Employer argued that the Grievant’s actions were dishonest and unprofessional. Specifically, the Employer argued that the Grievant committed two unacceptable acts: (1) the Grievant issued a speed citation based solely on a visual estimate; and (2) the Grievant falsified an affidavit. In particular, the Grievant knew that she did not use a radar gun to check the driver’s speed; however, on the affidavit (ticket), the Grievant indicated that she used a radar gun. Further, the Grievant signed the false affidavit, under penalty of perjury, assuring that the information contained in the affidavit was correct.

The Union argued that the Grievant’s actions were appropriate. Drivers frequently speed down the road in front of the Grievant’s residence, and several serious accidents occurred on that road in the past. Additionally, the Union argued that the Grievant did not intend to deceive when she indicated on the citation that she checked the driver’s speed with a radar gun. Further, the Union argued that the in-car audio/video shows that the Grievant was professional during the traffic stop. Finally, the Union argued that removal was too severe given the alleged violation.

The Arbitrator denied the grievance because the Arbitrator determined that the Employer had just cause to terminate the Grievant. Specifically, the Arbitrator concluded that the Grievant signed an inaccurate citation. The Arbitrator reasoned that there is no place on a traffic citation for an estimate to be checked. In fact, the Grievant indicated three times on the citation that she checked the speed using a radar gun. Accordingly, the Arbitrator determined that the Employer had just cause to remove the Grievant.