## Facts

- Morton Salt Company employed a bargaining-unit worker represented by United Steelworkers, Local 12606.
- The employee was arrested off duty for possession of marijuana with intent to sell.
- Morton maintained a code of conduct barring drug use that would affect the workplace.
- The employee’s manager learned of the arrest and worried the employee might be selling marijuana to other Morton employees.
- While the criminal charges were pending, the employee signed an agreement requiring random drug testing.
- Morton later asserted the agreement was not a binding contract.
- The employee believed that if he complied with the testing agreement and was not sentenced to jail, he could keep working for Morton.
- The employee continued working during the pending criminal matter and did not fail any drug tests.
- The employee later pleaded guilty and received probation (not incarceration).
- Morton terminated the employee after the guilty plea and probation sentence.
- The union filed a grievance challenging whether the discharge satisfied the collective bargaining agreement’s just-cause requirement.

## Issues

1. Whether Morton had just cause under the collective bargaining agreement to discharge the employee based on an off-duty marijuana offense that resulted in a guilty plea and probation.
2. What effect, if any, the employee’s signed random-testing agreement had on the just-cause analysis, including the employee’s claimed understanding that compliance and avoidance of jail would allow continued employment.
3. Whether Morton proved a sufficient workplace-related basis for discharge where the employer’s concern involved possible workplace drug activity, yet the employee continued working and did not fail random drug tests.

## Decision

- The dispute proceeded to labor arbitration under the parties’ collective bargaining agreement and is reported as *Morton Salt Co., 125 Lab. Arb. Rep. 346 (2008)*.
- The arbitration addressed whether Morton’s termination of the employee met the contractual just-cause standard in light of the off-duty drug case and the intervening random-testing agreement.
- Publicly available summaries describe the dispute and the competing positions but do not state the award’s final outcome or any specific remedy.

## Legal Principles

- Under a just-cause clause, the employer bears the burden to show that discharge was warranted under the facts and the agreement.
- When alleged misconduct occurs off duty, just-cause analysis often turns on whether the employer shows a legitimate workplace-related basis for discipline (for example, safety risks, rule violations tied to work, or credible evidence of workplace distribution).
- An employer’s written agreement imposing conditions during a pending matter (such as random testing) may be relevant to just cause if it shaped the parties’ expectations about continued employment while charges were unresolved.
- Evidence that an employee continued working and passed required drug tests may be weighed when the employer’s stated concern is workplace drug use or drug-related risk.

## Conclusion

*Morton Salt Co., 125 Lab. Arb. Rep. 346 (2008),* is a labor-arbitration case arising from Morton’s discharge of a Steelworkers-represented employee after an off-duty arrest and guilty plea for possession of marijuana with intent to sell, where the employee had signed and complied with a random drug-testing agreement during the pending charges and received probation rather than jail; the grievance placed at issue whether the discharge satisfied just cause and how the testing agreement and asserted workplace concerns should factor into that determination, though public summaries do not report the award’s ultimate disposition or remedy.
