supervision documentation not required with others which is better known as a verb second step a written reprimand or which could be placed in a point of thirst that a final written warning placed in place for the force that discharge and  arbitration the company started off with a written one which is totally legal and which is that it's on as exhibit page on three offenses including dishonesty a drug in his drinking when duty or during a time employment but to subpoena unlawful unauthorized strike against employer recklessness resulting in a serious accident which could be considered horseplay while on duty thought here i thought the arbitrator's ruling was that yes you had violated the attendance policy but that wasn't a ground for firing ok but they still use it in this against me even though he said it was a posting was not a basis for the are that the arbitrator could use to terminate him having concluded that the being late wasn't enough no order work become for workers what happened is on the article fourteen says no one other for dishonesty drunkenness could be terminated unless during the time employment that's what they article which isn't a thing so if i'm not at work i can you can't terminate me for being drunk at home a dishonest home so that's you save time for yes see you have three minutes and will hear from the company good afternoon your owners may please the court room in journey on behalf of the appellee the district court correctly grant summary judgment in this case there were no genuine issues of material fact and those claims are not are not part of this lawsuit this case really is about whether the companies decision to recommend arbitration and then later to amend the debases for arbitration based on appellants conduct w discriminatory decisions under the americans with disabilities act and title seven they were not discriminatory decisions for several reasons the first is that appellant is not a qualified individual the disability is that term is contemplated by the  the second is that even if appellant was disabled under the undisputed facts are such that there was no adverse employment action taken against him on the basis of that disability and that the appellate had legitimate business reasons for all of the actions taken with respect to the appellants employment there's also no record evidence of any discriminatory intent there's no evidence of discriminatory actions there's no record evidence of retaliation or any discrimination of any kind  it's important to note that the appellant has had the case that the c v a grievance are the arbitration there's been the workers compensation proceedings he's brought his case to the national labor relations board several ministry of agencies in this  court there's been no finding of any wrongdoing by the company the decision was upheld by an independent arbitrator of the germination decision and that during the time that decision was represented by competent counsel the other arguments discretion was abused and we would ask that any extraneous material outside the record not not be considered unless there are questions from the panel theorist statement about being is when he returned after his shoulder injury  when the appellant came back there is no light duty type position in the call of the bottling facility but it's usually that the night shift is less onerous in terms of volume and work so the record the undisputed facts and records show that the supervisors generally try to react on a people to the work force by assigning them to the night shift until they're back and that was not a discriminatory act that was an act to benefit the appellant and get him reacclimated to to his to the rigors of the job and to point out that the parent passed a functional capacity examination testified that that he wasn't he wasn't disabled as for your honour's question regarding the make up of the workforce again the evidence in the record shows a very diverse workforce and that the terminator sees me that the disciplinary decisions based on attendance which was the original basis for a discipline the company has a large workforce and what every so often supervisors make ok we're going to a sweep and check the last several months of attendance and see what shakes out there were fifteen people selected for discipline over the period in question that led to the arbitration for appellants termination of those fifteen i believe that six were african american six were hispanic three were caucasian which is roughly equivalent to the statistical breakdown of a hell of a pelleas work force which is on the one which is these part of the record below there are no other questions that i was just absent for want october fourteenth and reality their disability letter shows that they need to september twenty sixth to november eighth so they incorrectly  a final and binding could be overturned it was fraudulent misconduct and oppression so those are things that could be overturned recall as it was brought up before and another argument is that the judge kaplan when he said that that i was my this is this is on my name that doing fraud i got a payout from the workman's comp board which at twenty five percent loss use had surgery on my shoulder july twentieth two thousand