What Is Just Cause?
Most collective bargaining agreements state that management can only discipline or discharge employees for "just cause." This standard — sometimes written as "just and sufficient cause" or "proper cause" — is not defined in the contract itself. Instead, arbitrators have developed a consistent set of tests to evaluate whether discipline was justified.
The most widely used framework comes from Arbitrator Carroll Daugherty's 1966 Enterprise Wire decision, which outlined seven questions that arbitrators use to evaluate disciplinary actions. If management fails even one of these tests, an arbitrator may reduce or overturn the discipline entirely.
Test 1: Notice
Did management give the employee forewarning or foreknowledge that the conduct could lead to discipline of the degree imposed?
Employees must know in advance that their behavior is prohibited and what the consequences could be. This can come from a written rule, a past warning, a posted policy, or even common sense (theft is obviously terminable). If the rule is new, unadvertised, or inconsistently enforced, management may fail this test.
Test 2: Reasonable Rule
Was the rule or order reasonably related to the efficient and safe operation of the workplace?
Management has broad authority to set workplace rules, but those rules must be rational and connected to legitimate business interests. An arbitrator will not uphold discipline based on an arbitrary or capricious rule that has no real workplace justification.
Test 3: Investigation
Did management investigate before imposing discipline — and was that investigation conducted fairly and objectively?
Management cannot discipline based on assumption or rumor. They must conduct a real investigation: gather the facts, talk to witnesses, review available evidence, and give the employee a chance to respond. A rushed or one-sided investigation is a significant arbitration vulnerability.
Test 4: Proof
Did the investigation produce substantial evidence or proof of guilt?
The evidence doesn't need to meet a criminal standard — but it must be more than a hunch. Arbitrators typically apply a "preponderance of the evidence" standard: was it more likely than not that the employee did what management claims? Circumstantial evidence can be sufficient, but management bears the burden of proof.
Test 5: Equal Treatment
Has management applied its rules, orders, and penalties consistently? Were similarly situated employees treated the same?
This is the disparate treatment test. If Employee A was fired for the same conduct that Employee B received a warning for — and there's no legitimate reason for the difference — the discipline may not hold. Document comparators carefully: same supervisor, same rule, same approximate timeframe.
Test 6: Due Process
Did management apply the appropriate penalty? Was the degree of discipline reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and the employee's record?
Discipline should be progressive for most offenses. A first-time infraction rarely warrants immediate termination unless it was severe (violence, theft, safety violations). Look at the employee's discipline history: a long clean record is a strong mitigating factor. Arbitrators have broad authority to reduce excessive penalties.
Test 7: Penalty Proportionate
Was the penalty imposed reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and the employee's past record?
Even when management proves the misconduct occurred, the penalty can still be reduced if it's disproportionate. An arbitrator can substitute a lesser penalty — a suspension for a termination, a warning for a suspension — when the punishment doesn't fit the offense.
MyCBA's Steward Trainer walks you through real just cause scenarios in roleplay and scenario modes so you can practice applying these tests before you sit across from management. The more fluent you are with these seven questions, the stronger advocate you'll be for your members.