The issue for Kevin with respect to his letter of dismissal from his employer Davis Wigets is whether or not the dismissal was fair. Action taken by an employer is always examined with reference to the employer's responsibilities toward his or her employees and whether or not that action is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Download file to see previous pages
Davis' company rules define such conduct as gross misconduct with the result that the employee in question is subject to summary dismissal. This kind of conduct is considered gross conduct since the employer considers that machinery should be operated by a specific number of employees. The first issue is therefore whether or not such a standard and rule by Davis is fair and reasonable. Having regard to onerous duty placed upon the employee by virtue of Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, such a standard and rule is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Section 2(2) provides as follows:
"...the matters to which that duty extends include, in particular - the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health; the provision of such information, instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so employees that is, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe, without risks to health, and adequate as regards facilities and arrangements for their welfare at work."1
This statutory duty on the part of the employer was preceded by a common law duty to provide for the health and safety of all employees.2 The House of Lords held in Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co. Ltd v English  3 All ER 628 that the duty was "personal to the employer."3 The duty to provide a safe place of work is for the safety of all employees and the nature of both the statutory and common law duty is such that it gives rise to what might be a strict liability. Having regard to the consequences of a breach of such duty it is not unfair nor is it unreasonable for Davis to have in place rules that require a designated number of employees to operate its machinery. It is assumed that should the machinery be under operated it could render the machinery unsafe with the result that Davis is liable for any resulting harm to its employees.
Moreover in 1993 the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 were implemented and fortified the nature of the employer's duty to provide a safe and healthy workplace. Upon a broad interpretation of the 1992 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations that duty is unquestionably a strict duty. The 1992 regulations imposes upon the employer a continuing duty to ensure that all health risks are eliminated or at the very least minimized. This continuing duty is necessary:
"...for the purpose of identifying the measures he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed on him by or under the relevant statutory provisions."4
It therefore follows that the rule implemented by Davis to ensure that a specific number of employees operate machinery is fair and reasonable having regard to the statutory and common law duty to guard against risks to its employee's safety. Certainly Davis is entitled to take steps to ensure that the risk of harm associated with under manning the machinery is alleviated. In Walker v Northumberland County Council  IRLR 35 it was held that once an employer becomes aware of the risk to employees' health, the employer is duty bound to take steps to alleviate that risk.5 Obviously, Davis has decided to alleviate the risk of harm by designating wilful failure to report to the
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“Kevin's Dismissal Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words”, n.d.)
Kevin's Dismissal Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/people/1514748-kevins-dismissal
(Kevin'S Dismissal Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words)
Kevin'S Dismissal Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words. https://studentshare.org/people/1514748-kevins-dismissal.
“Kevin'S Dismissal Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/people/1514748-kevins-dismissal.
The act of Jill, the head of the nursery, in including in the employment reference an unfounded statement that, "There have been several complaints by parents that she (Anne) is unkind to their children" is an act of being unfair. Such a statement is unfounded and biased for the complaints were never brought to Anne's attention.
Below is a hypothetical conflict faced by an employee in a national company:
Andy's company called Secure It is changing to a web-based order system, using e-mail and also limiting visitations to cases where customers respond to post or e-mail promotion for a security check.
Jeffrey is an active member of the town's Gay Community Association, which holds its monthly committee meetings at his flat. He explained this to Sergeant Williams and promised a list of names when he had checked with his fellow committee members that they were happy for him to pass their names onto the police.
Since there has not been a proper procedure undertaken by Biosynth to establish whether Parveen and Joshua's behaviour or actions were minor acts of misconduct or grave acts of misconduct, the two employees remain as such until a proper termination and dismissal occurs.
Due to an increase in competition in the area Helen is now finding it hard to make the mortgage payments and wants to sell the property. However there are some liens on the property that a prospective buyer would need to be informed of before a legal sale could take place.
The researcher states that, although, Raj’s employer reserved the legal right to end his employment contract, their failure to serve proper notice on him regarding the issue amounts to unfair dismissal. In light of his summary dismissal, Raj has the rights to pursue claims for his unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
He started working at the Company when he was 20 years old and got on well with colleagues. He had an excellent work record and has not had any oral or written warnings before.
This is a substantial period
3 Pages(750 words)Case Study
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Save Your Time for More Important Things
Let us write or edit the case study on your topic
with a personal 20% discount.