Operator pays sacked man
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN EMPLOYEE'S notice of resignation, if not put into effect, could not remain in the air indefinitely and must lapse after a reasonable time, say a month.
This was the view of a Birmingham Industrial Tribunal, when it awarded lorry driver E. J. Law £882 compensation for unfair dismissal against his former employers, aluminium stockholders, Alustock Ltd.
The company had claimed that Mr Law had resigned.
Mr Law was employed from January, 1973, lived in Rugby and, in October, 1976, was working at the company's West Bromwich depot. He decided he would like a job closer to home and, on October 22, gave a month's notice of his intention to leave.
On October 25, by letter, the company thanked him for his services and said it felt it would be more suitable to pay him a month's salary in lieu.
After considering the offer of another job, Mr Law notified the company, on October 26, that he wished to withdraw his notice.
At a meeting with his superiors, on October 28, he was not told that the company would refuse to accept the withdrawal of notice, and he gained the impression it had been accepted.
The Tribunal said the company's conduct over the next few months was quite consistent with it having accepted the withdrawal of notice.
In January, 1977, the company issued Mr Law with a revised contract of employment.
Mr Law was a man, who, it was admitted, had given conscientious service and was obviously to be trusted.
On a couple of occasions, he returned to the depot late and there was a fuss because he had not notified the company by telephone.
The director concerned, a Mr Jones, then wrote to Mr Law reminding him that he had handed in his notice in October, and saying that, if he had not found alternative employment by February, 28, his position with the company would have to be reconsidered.
Mr Law was dismissed on March 3.
Finding that the dismissal was unfair, the Tribunal said that, in evidence, Mr Jones had admitted this complaints against Mr Law did not justify dismissal, and they were bound to agree with him.