AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Dismissal claim was out of time

21st August 1997, Page 15
21st August 1997
Page 15
Page 15, 21st August 1997 — Dismissal claim was out of time
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?

6 6

• The former transport manager of Shawmoss Transport Services of Cambuslang, Archibald Rattray, who was sacked after being accused of theft, has lost a claim for unfair dismissal before a Glasgow

Industrial Tribunal. The tribunal held that they had no jurisdiction to hear the claim by Rattray, of Pine Court, Greenhills, East Kilbride, because it had been presented out of time, The tribunal said that it preferred the evidence of managing director Douglas Hebburn that Rattray had been dismissed during a telephone conversation on 26 November. Rat-tray said that the first he knew of his dismissal was when he received a letter dated 28 November.

The tribunal said Hebburn was also managing director of the associated Cubex Logistics and the two companies worked in close association with one another. Rattray, in his capacity of transport manager of Shawmoss, would frequently visit Cubex's premiss.

During October 1996 it became clear that goods belonging to third parties were being stolen on a fairly large scale. Investigations revealed that £18,000 worth of goods had gone missing and suspicion fell on Rattray He was interviewed by police on 26 November. The police advised Hebburn that a person found in possession of some of the stolen goods said she had purchased them from Rattray The police said that he was to be charged.

Hebburn said though he could not remember the exact words used, he had made it clear to Rattray that he was dismissed from that date during the telephone conversation on 26 November.

For Rattray, James Cowan said the letter of 28 November merely advised him that his employment had come to an end.

There was no reference to the telephone conversation of 26 November and in particular the letter did not pretend to confirm that Rattray had been dismissed on that date.

The tribunal said that though the letter did not confirm a decision to dismiss on 26 November, it bore in mind that it was written by a layman understandably ignorant of the niceties of employment law.


comments powered by Disqus