The importance of well worded and comprehensive policies cannot be overstated and in a recent decision we can see how the Tribunal found in favour of the employer as the policies the employee was in breach of were made very clear to them at the beginning, and throughout, their employment.
We have previously highlighted a case where the Tribunal highlighted the importance of contracts and handbooks, and this case is a prime example of where company policies back up disciplinary action taken.
In the case of Da Silva v Kepak UD1378 [2011]the employee who had worked for the employer between 2007 and 2011 was a boner in the employers meat processing plant. The employee was dismissed for taking a photograph of a 'pile-up' of work that had built up while he went on a comfort break.
The employee who was in receipt of a final written warning was dismissed following a full and thorough investigation and disciplinary process where he had been afforded fair procedures, the right of representation, and cross-examine evidence and make submissions in his defence. There was also a fluent portuguese speaker there to whom he could raise grievances etc. The employee also had the right of appeal and in the appeal the appeals officer did uphold the original decision but decided to pay him notice he was due.
The employer argued that it was clearly laid out that due to the nature of the work, hygiene was of the utmost concern and with the high level clients that they had, the could be audited at a moments notice. for that reason mobile phones were not permitted on the factory floor and all employees were made aware of this, and the possibility of cross contamination. There was a zero tolerance policy in relation to hygiene. The issue of confidentiality was also a concern with the company and for these reasons the use of mobile phones was considered to be serious misconduct and subject to disciplinary action.
The Tribunal were furnished with copies of the employers detailed policies where it emphasised the issue of cross contamination. The tribunal asked the employee about the previous warnings and he said he did not appeal these nor did he ever raise any grievances regarding getting cover on the line. The tribunal was unanimous in their decision that the employee was fairly dismissed as he knew he should not have had his mobile phone on him .
This very sensible decision illustrates that where an employer can show they followed procedures and also had the appropriate policies and procedures in place they can defend themselves against claims from employees who common sense would dictate are in the wrong.
