AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

'Impulsive' spot sacking

29th November 1990
Page 19
Page 19, 29th November 1990 — 'Impulsive' spot sacking
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?

• Williams Bros (Wales) has been told to pay a driver more than £3,000 compensation for unfair dismissal after he was sacked on the spot when he threatened to take a written warning up with his union.

An Abergele industrial tribunal heard that Thomas Davies had worked for the company for 19 years. In February he was warned verbally for failing to report a damaged bumper and failing to keep his vehicle clean. This was followed by a written warning in March over breaches of instructions.

In April a customer corn

6

plained that a load Davies had delivered was contaminated with coke and Davies was given a final written warning. He threw the note back at depot manager Peter Thomas, stating that he could not be warned in this way as the load had already been accepted.

Thomas followed Davies back to his vehicle. When he handed the warning to him again, Davies said he would talk to his union, and it was then that he was sacked.

The tribunal ruled that the dismissal was unfair and said that Thomas had overreacted and had been impulsive.

It reduced the award by 40% to 23,211.50 as Davies was partly to blame.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus