The Grievant, a Police Officer, was dispatched to conduct a welfare check requested by the father of an autistic juvenile visiting her mother. The father reported receiving text messages from the juvenile stating the mother was yelling and screaming in the home. The Grievant reviewed the call notes prior to arrival and was aware the juvenile was autistic. Body camera footage showed the Grievant speaking with the mother and juvenile inside the residence. During the interaction, the juvenile repeatedly spoke over the Grievant while he attempted to ask questions. The Employer asserted the Grievant abruptly yelled at the juvenile, causing her to recoil and become shaken. The Union contended the footage showed the Grievant raising his voice to gain control of the conversation and instruct the juvenile not to scream at him, which resulted in the juvenile calming down and becoming compliant. The juvenile acknowledged she had been yelling during the argument with her mother and raised her voice at the Grievant but apologized after the Grievant objected.

After completing the welfare check and ensuring the safety and well-being of the juvenile, the Grievant exited the residence and encountered the father, who had arrived outside. The Grievant informed the father the juvenile was fine and advised he could not end the visitation with the mother because it was a civil matter. The father attempted to show the Grievant text messages from the juvenile, but the Grievant declined to review them. The father then expressed that the Grievant was rude and requested the Grievant’s name and badge number. The father later filed a complaint with the department.

Following an investigation, the Employer issued the Grievant a one-day suspension for violating rules “Conduct Unbecoming Department Personnel” and “Unsatisfactory Performance”. A grievance was filed.

The Employer argued the discipline was supported by just cause and that the body camera footage showed the Grievant yelling at a juvenile with autism despite being aware of her condition and having received training on interacting with individuals with disabilities. The Employer argued that the Grievant should have spoken with the mother outside the home prior to entering; he should not have yelled at the juvenile; and he should have reviewed the text messages offered by the father. The Employer argued that the Grievant’s actions were egregious thereby allowing it to bypass progressive discipline.

The Union argued the Grievant’s actions were a reasonable attempt to control and de-escalate the situation and that suspension was excessive in light of the Grievant’s limited disciplinary history, which consisted of one (1) unrelated oral reprimand. The Union argued that there was no policy that required the Grievant to speak with the mother before entering the home, that proper procedure would be to speak with the victim first, not the abuser, and that the Grievant needed to assess the safety and well-being of the juvenile. While the Grievant loudly interrupted the juvenile who was trying to talk over him, he achieved the goal of getting their attention after which the Grievant was able to engage the mother and juvenile with empathy and understanding.  The Union also argued that the Grievant properly walked away from the father which was not a violation of policy.

The Arbitrator determined the one-day suspension was excessive. The Grievant was dispatched to a welfare check to ascertain the safety and well-being of the juvenile. Observing the juvenile in the home was threshold to engaging in endeavors to resolve the conflict between the juvenile and mother. While the Grievant did raise his voice, the conduct did not rise to the level of a “serious and aggravated nature” that would justify bypassing progressive discipline. The Arbitrator also found that it was unnecessary to review the text messages that the father offered to the Grievant because the juvenile had indicated that she had embellished them.

Grievance is sustained. The suspension is reduced to a written reprimand and the Grievant shall be made whole for the one-day suspension.

Employer: City of Riverside                                                                                   Date:  March 2024