Inter-Pack Corp.

Inter-Pack Corp. (defendant) maintained a published policy against excessive absenteeism, defined as an unexcused absence rate of 5 percent or more. A first offense resulted in a written warning. A second offense resulted in a disciplinary suspension for a maximum period of two weeks. Employee J was hired as a dye-cutter operator on June 3, 1985. In the second half of 1985, J received a written warning for her first offense of excessive absenteeism based on four absences. In December 1985, J went on medical leave for a few days and missed another three days of work to attend a family funeral. (The December absences were not subject to any disciplinary action.) In the first two months of 1986, J had three unexcused absences, or an unexcused absence rate of 11 percent, due to a personal court day, a failure-to-report day, and a day when she reported to work but went home sick. Inter-Pack suspended J for two weeks without pay for this second offense of excessive absenteeism. J had eight months’ seniority at the time. Two other employees had been previously disciplined with a three-day suspension for a second offense of excessive absenteeism. One employee G, who had similar seniority as J, had failed to report to work for five separate days (16.6 percent absence rate). Another employee with greater seniority than J and G had failed to report to work for three days (10 percent absence rate). J’s union (plaintiff) filed a labor grievance, challenging the length of J’s suspension. The matter was submitted to arbitration.