AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Willis dismissal 'was fair'

28th July 1988, Page 19
28th July 1988
Page 19
Page 19, 28th July 1988 — Willis dismissal 'was fair'
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• A disciplinary interview which led to the dismissal of an accident-prone driver by James Strange had not been conducted strictly in accordance with the procedures laid down in his terms of employment, but a Manchester industrial tribunal has decided that the dismissal was fair.

Rejecting a claim for compensation for unfair dismissal from driver David Willis, the tribunal found that in the circumstances the interview had been reasonably conducted because Willis had known what he was accused of and had had an opportunity of putting forward his case.

The tribunal was told that Willis had been involved in a number of accidents before being dismissed on 8 January. On 18 December he had taken a fully loaded vehicle home, con

trary to the company's instructions. Willis had turned his vehicle over on a farm lane, causing considerable damage, having taken it off the proper route to visit his home to collect a thermos flask. He had been warned that if he had any more accidents it was likely that he would be sacked because of the probability that the company would have to pay a higher insurance premium.

The tribunal said that the dismissal was fair because Willis had already been warned of the likely consequences of any further accidents.

The company's managing. director had been satisfied on reasonable grounds that Willis lacked capability and that he had committed an act of gross misconduct, and dismissal was a reasonable response to his behaviour.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus