vertime hallenge ismissed
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
T IS IMPOSSIBLE for a lorry river to carry out his emloyment if he is only going to ork during normal working ours without doing any vertime.
This was the view taken by a heffield Industrial Tribunal hen it rejected a claim of nfair dismissal by driver R. latt against Macawber Engieering Ltd after he was acked for refusing to work vertime.
Mr Platt was one of two (rivers employed, and his iormal working hours were retween 0830 and 1700.
It was admitted that, when ie was engaged, he was told ie would not normally be ,xpected to work overtime. The tribunal said that, mlike other employees, a [river would realise there vere occasions when he might iave to work in excess of his tormal hours.
When the company's reords were examined, it was lear that, Mr Platt had to stay way from home overnight on )nly one occasion, so the >vertime he was asked to vork had not been a very )nerous burden.
After twice refusing to take )ut loads because be feared he vould be back late — one iccasion necessitating anther employee, not employed is a driver, taking out the lorry – Mr Platt was given verbal Lnd written warning. When he gain refused to take out a Dad on May 26, he was lismissed.
The tribunal found it was an Tiplied term and condition of is contract of employment hat he would be required to 'rive certain times outside tormal working hours. To efuse to undertake any driv-ig that involved overtime as a repudiation of Mr Platt's ontract of employment.
Consequently, because of hat, the tribunal found that he lad not been dismissed but ad voluntarily terminated his mployment.