| Summary |
UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Misconduct - Respondent claimed applicant dismissed for disobeying instructions regarding smoking at work - Applicant suspended after seen smoking while working - Respondent considered risk of reoffending and risk to its service contract with third party high - Applicant dismissed for serious misconduct after failed to propose alternatives to dismissal as requested - Applicant previously warned for smoking in uniform and instructed on appropriate behaviour - Advised breach of instructions would be serious misconduct - Applicant argued warning expired and code of conduct listed smoking as only misconduct, not serious misconduct - While warning likely expired did not mean formal instructions to restrict applicant’s smoking to authorised times and places expired with it - Applicant believed other positions proposed by respondent would have paid less, but his non-response meant matter never progressed to negotiations - Respondent justified in relying on specific instructions issued to applicant with warning and entitled to consider their breach serious misconduct - Any suspension agreed to by applicant’s representative - Dismissal justified - Trolley person |