Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LABOR—ARBITRATION—Nurse’s termination for possessing firearm on hospital premises upheld, (Feb 19, 2025)

By WK Editorial Staff

The incident involved a vintage shotgun.

The discharge of a Michigan nurse for possessing a firearm on hospital premises was neither arbitrary nor capricious and consistent with an applicable labor contract, an arbitrator concluded. The nurse’s union filed a grievance contesting her discharge, arguing that the penalty was excessive and inconsistent with just cause. The arbitrator denied the grievance, finding that the grievant violated the employer’s no-weapons policy by bringing a firearm onto hospital premises, which is also prohibited by Michigan law. Despite the nurse’s otherwise unblemished 13-year record, the arbitrator determined that the policy breach and associated safety risks justified termination (Aspirus Keweenaw Hospital & Clinics, Inc. and Michigan Nurses Association (Hornberger, Arb. Oct. 21, 2024)).

Gun show at the hospital. The incident occurred on April 29, 2023, when the grievant, a 13-year employee of the hospital, brought a vintage shotgun onto the hospital premises. The firearm was brought in by a nurse technician at the employee’s request. The nurse technician was showing it to the employee for potential purchase.

Observed at nurse’s station. Witnesses observed the firearm at the nurse’s station and later in the ambulance bay. Although the gun was unloaded, it was visible to several hospital employees. The grievant admitted to handling the weapon, stating that she ensured it was not loaded and that she did not perceive it as a threat.

No-weapons policy. The hospital maintained a strict no-weapons policy, which employees were required to acknowledge annually. The policy explicitly prohibited firearms on hospital grounds, aligning with Michigan state law prohibiting weapons in hospitals. The grievant had received training on this policy and admitted awareness of the prohibition.

Violation. During its investigation, the hospital reviewed surveillance footage and interviewed employees, concluding that the grievant had violated its policies by instructing the nurse technician to bring the firearm into the hospital and handling it within hospital premises.

Union’s argument. The union contended that termination was excessive, citing the employee’s long service record, lack of prior discipline, and the absence of any safety threat.

Rural folk. The grievant argued that her actions were rooted in a personal interest in hunting, common among hospital staff in the rural region, and that she had no malicious intent. The union also highlighted that the firearm was not loaded and that no patients were present during the incident.

Inherent risk nonetheless. The arbitrator acknowledged the grievant’s strong service record and the cultural context of firearm ownership in the region but upheld the hospital’s decision and emphasized the inherent risk of bringing a firearm into a healthcare setting and the necessity of adhering to policies designed to ensure workplace safety.

Clear knowledge of policy. The arbitrator noted that the grievant had clear knowledge of the no-weapons policy and its potential consequences. Thus, the grievance was denied, and the arbitrator found that the hospital acted within its rights under the labor contract and in compliance with Michigan law.

Attorneys: Kevin Terry and Kurt F. Ellison for Aspirus Keweenaw Hospital & Clinics, Inc. Benjamin Curl for Michigan Nurses Association.

Companies: Aspirus Keweenaw Hospital & Clinics, Inc.; Michigan Nurses Association

Cases: Labor Arbitration Discharge UnionsMembers RemediesDamages