A recent case decision from the EAT has shown that even though an employee may return from annual leave later that originally required, the sanction of dismissal is far too severe. In the case of Ullah -v- LCML Limited UD612/2011 the employee was due to return to Ireland on the 20th August according to the employer and the 23rd August according to the employee. As it transpired the employee did not get back to Ireland until the 27th August due to heavy flooding in his holiday destination and returned to work on the 30th August.
The Employee was suspended pending his ability to produce his booking receipts and subsequently dismissed as the employer felt he could no longer trust the employee. the tribunal noted that the employer sought to rely on an incident from two years previous where the employee failed to return on time from annual leave, these matters were never raised with the employee at the time, and the tribunal found that on this occasion this was a disproportionate penalty. The employee was awarded €4,500 as a result.
This case also had some controversy over a "signed" contract which was produced by the employer and had tippex on it. these issues were not of any recourse to the disciplinary issue at hand but on the matter brought under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, the employee was awarded a further four weeks pay.
If an employee is late back from a holiday, it is most certainly a disciplinary matter unless they can show they were not at fault and/or utilised the correct notice procedures in the course of this. However dismissal in such a scenario is not proportionate and could well result in a case as above.
