Tasty snack, hasty sack
Page 8
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
FOUR CARAMEL wafers led to the at a TNT Road Freight depot in Sco Checks revealed that Mr Duffy had an unopened biscuit packet and two security locking devices in his bag and a consignment of biscuits bound for a factory in Uddingston, near Glasgow, had been violated.
But an industrial tribunal in Glasgow ruled that TNT had unfairly dismissed the foreman, and awarded him compensation of £4,357.
The tribunal heard that Mr Duffy had been employed by the firm from August 1980 until he was dismissed on March 13, and had held his foremen's position for over a year. He had been working nightshift on March 13 when a security check was carried out at 4am.
The tribunal heard that on discovery of the biscuits, Mr Duffy said to his bosses: "Before you make fools of yourselves, my wife bought them."
This did not satisfy the management officials, since having the security locks also contravened the stated conduct policy of the Bel!shill firm. Mr Duffy was ordered to leave the firm's depot at Righead Industrial Estate pending an inquiry.
The tribunal heard that at the disciplinary hearing Mr Duffy could offer no credible explanation for the biscuits being in his bag and had said the locks were kept only to be "handy" in the event of a container needing to be locked. Management refused to accept this and sacked him.
The tribunal, however, decided the management had over-reacted, although they agreed that the grounds could have been sufficient to justify a sacking of foreman William Duffy tland.
sacking if a fuller investigation had been carried out.
The panel had been told it was company practice to register every security lock as it was being checked out from the storeroom — but found, through evidence, that the procedure was "fairly slack."
It was also noted that no signs had been posted or written documentation issued to workers to convey the firm's instructions on security locks. The tribunal, taking everything into account, deemed the dismissal to be unfair.
Mr Duffy had originally sought reinstatement from the company, but at the hearing the tribunal panel allowed him to change his submission to compensation only.
Recognising that Mr Duffy was still unemployed and in view of the current labour market, the tribunal compensated him until March, 1983.