Unfair dismissal cases offer a fascinating glimpse into the nuances and oddities of employment law. These cases provide valuable insights into the legal framework, but more importantly, they underscore the importance of fair treatment in the workplace. Whether you’re a worker keen on knowing your rights or an employer hoping to avoid the need to hire a dispute resolution lawyer, the cases below are sure to be enlightening. We’ve selected three fascinating real-life examples from unfair dismissal case law, exploring the circumstances, decisions, and outcomes that shaped them.
-
Asleep on the Job
In the case of Sclater v Transdev Harbour City Ferries Pty Ltd (2019), Australia’s Fair Work Commission (FWC) examined the dismissal of a ferry master who was found asleep during his shift. Mr. Sclater, the ferry master, was discovered asleep on a bench in the wheelhouse while the ship’s engineer was manning the helm. Mr. Sclater had been taking cough medicine, which caused drowsiness, and he had forgotten to take his heart medication that day.
Despite Mr. Sclater’s argument that he was only asleep for a few minutes and had not noticed the drowsiness warning on the cough medicine, the FWC found that he had breached the company’s Drug and Alcohol Policy. The FWC concluded that, given his critical role, he needed to remain fully alert at all times. Consequently, his dismissal was deemed valid.
This case highlights the importance of adhering to workplace policies, especially in roles where safety is paramount. Employers must ensure all team members are aware of and comply with such policies to avoid similar situations.
-
An Accident Waiting to Happen
West v Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd (2017) dealt with the dismissal of an employee who allowed a casual labor hire worker to operate a crane without adequate supervision. The labor hire worker, who had no training, nearly caused an accident. Despite this, the employee argued that the company had previously allowed untrained workers to operate cranes without incident.
The FWC found that the dismissal was unfair, as the company had set a precedent by allowing similar conduct in the past. The employee was reinstated, and the case served as a reminder for employers to consistently enforce safety protocols and address misconduct as it occurs.
Though this case illustrates the importance of consistency in enforcing workplace policies, it’s also a lesson for employees. You may not lose your job from following problematic precedents in the workplace, but you could be putting yourself, your colleagues, and members of the public at risk.
-
Gender Discrimination
With Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP (2002), the US Supreme Court addressed the issue of gender-based discrimination in the workplace. Eric Thompson – the plaintiff – worked for the North American Stainless company. The kicker is that his fiancée worked there too. Thompson’s fiancée had recently filed a gender discrimination claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Soon after, Thompson was laid off. He claimed his termination was an indirect form of retaliation for his fiancée’s complaint.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Thompson, stating that third-party retaliation is a valid claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This landmark decision emphasized that employers cannot retaliate against employees who are closely associated with someone who has filed a discrimination complaint.
These three cases provide valuable lessons for employers and employees alike. They highlight the importance of adhering to workplace policies, considering the context of employee actions, and maintaining consistency in disciplinary measures. By understanding and applying these principles, employers can create a fair and just workplace, while employees can better understand their rights and responsibilities.