1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
Lost prawn row
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE NEED to give writ warning of intending dismit was stressed by the Scott Industrial Tribunal in 1 application of Stepl. McCutcheon against Geo] and Bailie Ltd of Leith, fro: food distributor. The co pany contended that the ; plicant had taken unauth ised days off, leading to missal.
The applicant was a trait storeman recruited in Ju 1976 and dismissed on April 1977; he had been promoted driver but was expected work also in the store. came to regard himself al driver, the firm contend( and reluctant to work in I warehouse; he also took t authorised days off, the ft complained, although this vt denied.
When a £50 parcel of praw was lost on April 29 the apt cant was dismissed althou the firm indicated that ti was not the reason for the d missal. IVIcCutcheon claim that the prawns were not i eluded in his load and th drivers did not normally che each delivery load befo starting out.
The Tribunal hesitated accept the alleged record absences as a sufficient reasi for dismissal unless there w evidence of a written warnii in the clearest terms, whii there was not in this case. T1 firm had failed to dischari the onus of proving that the was a record of unauthorisi absences.