State's top court: 20-day suspension OK for workplace noose
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - Washington's Supreme Court says a 20-day unpaid suspension without pay was an appropriate punishment for a Port of Seattle employee who left a noose hanging in the workplace.
In 2007 a 70-year-old white co-worker asked Mark Cann to put away a rope. Instead, in what he characterized as a joke, Cann tied it into a noose, saying that it was to put the co-worker "out of his misery."
The noose was observed and reported by a black co-worker with whom Cann had a recent falling out. The Port of Seattle fired Cann, but an arbitrator reinstated him with a 20-day suspension.
A King County Superior Court judge found that too lenient and boosted the suspension to six months.
But in a unanimous decision Thursday, the Supreme Court reinstated the arbitrator's award. The high court held that although Cann's acts were "ignorant and unacceptable," at a time when many working families live month-to-month, 20 days without pay was a significant punishment.
In 2007 a 70-year-old white co-worker asked Mark Cann to put away a rope. Instead, in what he characterized as a joke, Cann tied it into a noose, saying that it was to put the co-worker "out of his misery."
The noose was observed and reported by a black co-worker with whom Cann had a recent falling out. The Port of Seattle fired Cann, but an arbitrator reinstated him with a 20-day suspension.
A King County Superior Court judge found that too lenient and boosted the suspension to six months.
But in a unanimous decision Thursday, the Supreme Court reinstated the arbitrator's award. The high court held that although Cann's acts were "ignorant and unacceptable," at a time when many working families live month-to-month, 20 days without pay was a significant punishment.
OK this smells of the coworker trying to settle a score to me.
He OVERHEARD the subject of the noose, he wasn't the intended target of the joke.
Why make a big deal over tying a knot? The noose could signify anything. People are too sensitive - some are "professionally so" - most anything can offend them.
@contraryjim Not just 'tying a knot'. He also said what he felt the 'knot' was for.
@what? @contraryjim Yeah, it was for the WHITE co-worker.
Bottom line, state, county, city, job for life...
70 years old, now 76.. If he is still working he hasn't made very good life choices. S/B on a beach sippin mai tais
@Northriver I am retired military and just plain retired. I work part time just to have something to do. My life choices have been good enough to have a comfortable retirement. Some people just have a good work ethic.
@Northriver - the way I read this, the 70 year old didn't make the noose.
Can't fire public employees, even when they made nooses intended to harass black co workers. Amazing.
"unpaid suspension without pay"Â and that is bad writing....
@lakeview Read it again. He claims he made the noose for the WHITE co-worker.
@lakeview"Can't fire public employees"
I've known 2 WSDOT workers who were fired, one for filing bogus travel reports while visiting a GF in the area he drove to to do his job, the other for physically threatening another employee in the office.
My big question; is there an unpaid suspension with pay?
Hmmm, where does freedom of expression come in.. If someone isn't involved, they shouldn't be butting into stuff that doesn't involve them. So what, a noose.. poor taste, but to take offense to it... there is just to much of the PC stuff... People need to grow thicker skin... and quit being such wusses..Â
@Mr. HÂ It wasn't just the tying of a knot that caused this tool to get suspended, it was the tying of a noose and saying it was for a black coworker. He earned it, although he ought to have been fired not just given time off without pay.
@what?@Mr. HDid you read this article?
"In 2007 a 70-year-old white co-worker asked Mark Cann to put away a rope. Instead, in what he characterized as a joke, Cann tied it into a noose, saying that it was to put the co-worker "out of his misery."
and
"The noose was observed and reported by a black co-worker with whom Cann had a recent falling out."
Sometimes it is good to read to comprehend.
Â
Â
@Mr. H You can't honestly see the problem with hanging a noose around your black co workers? You wouldn't happen to be from Hayden, Idaho and a former executive of an aerospace company would you?
This is such bull. First the black employee wasn't even involved according to this and clearly used the incident to just settle an old score and even if they somehow were paranoid enough to think this implied a lynching they need a shrink not a lawyer. The original hanging of a noose was just ignorant and childish but a CRIME? Give me a break. 20 days without pay for being a jackass seems just. People are getting shot in road rage incidents because everyone is so friggin hypersenstitive we are being a nation of mega-toddlers.
@MHNÂ Shhh, someone will accuse you of being racist next.
@Just_Mike @MHN Ooooh me first me first...
How much money was spent on this crap?
Isn't that considered a hate crime punishable by Jail time DARN TOOTIN THAT SOB SHOULD BE FIRED ....Just sayin...
@Eharper "In 2007 a 70-year-old white co-worker asked Mark Cann to put away a rope. Instead, in what he characterized as a joke, Cann tied it into a noose, saying that it was to put the co-worker "out of his misery."" I'd say no because the noose was tied for the white co-worker not the black co-worker who filed the complaint.Â
Why did the supreme court involved. Don't we have any real crimes that should go to trial
@my2cents Because constitutional protections apply to the public sector.
If you are a public sector employee you are not held accountable for your actions. This is maybe our biggest problem in government. This is a fireable offense at Microsoft, google, Starbucks, 7-eleven, you name it.
"at a time when many working families live month-to-month, 20 days without pay was a significant punishment."
Punishments for misdeeds should not be adjusted based on the economy. That's not an appropriate reason because then "justice" gets applied differently to different people at different times. Would they have made it a 6 month suspension in the end if his family had been well-off and thus able to afford the loss of his income?
@spacegoddess I'm not sure what the precise issue was on appeal but, in general, courts give considerable deference to agency determinations---Haven't not read the opinion, I'm pretty sure the court employed a due process balancing test to uphold the initial determination (state interest v. individual interest v. risk of erroneous deprivation)
@rengic @spacegoddess My concern isn't with the court's determination (I think twenty days is reasonable for the offense, regardless of the "economy," provided that the employee admitted that what they did was inappropriate), it is with the statement that indicates that the state of the economy had bearing on the kind of discipline he received, and the further implication that he or someone else might have received a different punishment if the economy were good.
@spacegoddess I was thinking the same thing. Good point.