Ontario heavy machine operator fired for allegedly smoking pot at lunch gets job back
An arbitrator has ordered the immediate reinstatement of a heavy machine operator fired last summer from a “safety sensitive” plant in Toronto for allegedly getting high at lunch, then behaving in an “insolent” manner towards a senior manager after he was suspended pending investigation of cannabis use.
Joseph Sutton’s union, United Steelworkers Local 3950-65, grieved his July 8, 2025, discharge from MSC Toronto, a plant that specializes in producing custom coil-coated steel products that operates as Continuous Colour Coat Limited.
“There is no dispute that the workplace is safety sensitive, as was (Sutton’s) work on the control panel (that controls the plant’s paint line), which required his full attention and senses. The occurrence of a fatality at the plant underscores the need to take safety seriously,” Rishi Bandhu, the arbitrator, wrote in a recent decision.
In March 2018, emergency crews were called to the Etobicoke plant to rescue a man in his 30s who was trapped from the neck up. He was later pronounced dead.
“There is also no dispute that the plant’s rules establish that reporting to work under the influence of an intoxicant is prohibited,” Bandhu said. “In fact, (Sutton) admitted in his evidence that it was wrong to smoke cannabis during work hours and that such conduct was deserving of discipline.”
Sutton “denied that he smoked a cannabis joint, but acknowledged that he smoked a Player’s Light cigarette,” while out for a lunchtime walk around the plant that day while he was wearing company overalls.
But the adjudicator found that Sutton broke the plant’s rule against “reporting to work under the influence of alcohol or other intoxicants,” according to the decision dated Jan. 30.
“The evidence before me indicates that on July 8, 2025, Mr. Sutton smoked cannabis after 12:29 p.m. when he left the plant. Mr. Sutton then returned to the plant at approximately 12:47 p.m.,” Bandhu said.
“Although I did not hear evidence about the time that Mr. Sutton recommenced his post lunch duties on the control panel, I am satisfied that he would have done so within a window of time that he was under the influence of cannabis.“
Mohammed Mazaheri, the plant’s quality manager, testified that on July 8, 2025, he also went for a walk during his lunch break.
During his ramble, Mazaheri spotted Sutton smoking in his MSC coveralls, said the decision. “This struck him as unusual because there are designated areas in the plant for smoking.”
Mazaheri “smelled cannabis and the odour grew stronger as he approached where Mr. Sutton was standing. He did not stop to speak to him. When he passed Mr. Sutton, Mr. Mazaheri turned and observed that he was smoking what looked like a hand rolled joint,” said the decision.
He was concerned that Sutton “would return to work in an impaired state,” said the decision. “Under cross examination, Mr. Mazaheri stated that he was concerned for the safety of the employees that reported to him.”
Mazaheri told Jan Negrini, the plant’s general manager, about the pot smoking incident the next day.
The adjudicator notes ”there is no dispute that there were no safety related incidents in connection with Mr. Sutton’s operation of the console after he returned to work following his lunch break.”
After checking video surveillance from the plant, Hendren met with Sutton and a union steward.
”During the meeting, Mr. Hendren reminded Mr. Sutton of their earlier discussion in April in which he expressed concern that Mr. Sutton was smoking something other than tobacco while on duty,” said the decision.
When Sutton learned that “MSC had evidence of him smoking cannabis on July 8,” he denied doing so, and challenged Hendren by asking, “You let me run the console after I smoked pot?”
Hendren advised Sutton that he was suspended, pending an investigation. When he asked Sutton if he had anything to add, Sutton called him, “a f–king joker.”
Hendren asked Sutton if he “thought this was a joke?” No, replied Sutton, “you are a f–king joker.”
Sutton “admitted that he insulted Mr. Hendren,” said the decision. “He said he did so because ‘It was irritating and annoying what they were doing.’ He testified that he should not have said what he said.”
There “is no ambiguity about the comments” Sutton made, Bandhu said.
”The behaviour is significant insolent behaviour towards a high-ranking management employee. Mr. Sutton’s annoyance and aggravation at being told that the company believed he had (used) cannabis is, plainly, not an excuse for his behaviour,” said the arbitrator, noting Sutton’s “misconduct in this respect is significant and clearly deserving of discipline.”
Sutton used cannabis during “work hours, despite knowing that it was inappropriate to do so,” said the arbitrator.
Bandhu found that Sutton “was dishonest about his cannabis use and highly disrespectful towards a senior manager when approached about the matter. Though he acknowledged at the hearing that he should not have acted in the manner that he did, he has at no time apologized for his conduct.”
Two incidents where Sutton was disciplined last year are also an aggravating factor, according to the adjudicator. Those included a Feb. 2 2025, incident where Sutton got a “written reprimand for ‘causing scrap unnecessarily, faulty or careless workmanship’ and ‘leaving a job assignment or the plant without authorization,’” and smoking in a non-designated area on March 26, 2025.
Regarding the latter, Hendren, testified that when he spotted Sutton smoking on company surveillance cameras last March, he was concerned Sutton “may have been smoking cannabis because of the apparent length of his ‘haul’ and the large plume of smoke that followed. In addition, Mr. Sutton was not known to smoke cigarettes.”
Mitigating circumstances in Sutton’s case “include that there was no safety incident or evidence of diminished productivity” at the plant, said the adjudicator.
Sutton “acknowledged that his insolent conduct was wrong,” Bandhu said. “It also appears that (he) performs his work satisfactorily, despite the recent discipline. His nine years of service, except for the two incidents of misconduct in 2025, appear to be discipline free.”
The adjudicator said there’s no evidence about how much marijuana Sutton consumed at lunch on July 8, 2025, nor how strong it was.
“Under the circumstances, I can only conclude that Mr. Sutton used cannabis during work hours and reported to work under its influence,” Bandhu said.
“In the absence of specific evidence of impairment, I cannot conclude that discharge is warranted in the circumstances.”
The arbitrator ordered Sutton be “immediately” re-instated.
His ”disciplinary record is to reflect a three-month suspension of employment for violating (the plant’s rule about reporting to work under the influence) and for insolent behaviour towards a senior manager,” Bandhu said.
The adjudicator didn’t order any retroactive wages for Sutton.
“It is my hope that with this award, (Sutton) understands the importance of not reporting to work under the influence of cannabis (or any other intoxicant) and of demonstrating respect and professionalism towards his co-workers and supervisors,” Bandhu said.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.