| Summary |
UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Respondent argued applicant’s behaviour in workplace ongoing issue, however, until incident which led to dismissal issues not dealt with in disciplinary context – Respondent’s director (“H”) gave evidence that on many occasions defused situations where applicant behaved inappropriately towards others – H received complaint about applicant’s behaviour from immediate manager (“K”) – K claimed suffered health issues caused by applicant’s behaviour – H convened disciplinary meeting with applicant to discuss issues – Applicant’s support person claimed respondent’s meeting notes did not accurately record nature of meeting – Authority preferred H’s recollection of meeting – Applicant tabled with Authority letters from co-workers that supported position – Co-workers gave evidence aware of complaint against applicant but not asked to write letters by applicant – Authority found letters provided by two co-workers (“A”) and (“B”) so similar in structure and content that may have suggested co-workers copied each other – Co-workers argued not physically together when letters composed but B claimed saw A’s letter before composed own – H, in making final decision to dismiss applicant, discounted evidence of A and B based on collusion – H argued in concluding serious misconduct interviewed applicant’s previous two managers who confirmed had similar problems with applicant – Authority found in applicant’s performance appraisal prior to complaint from K, applicant’s relationships with customers excellent but way related to colleagues an issue – Applicant notified by respondent that attitude a problem but was not a disciplinary issue – Authority found open to respondent to find letters provided by co-workers not persuasive – Authority found allegation of misconduct properly put to applicant and properly organised disciplinary meeting followed – Respondent argued had obligation to provide K with safe workplace – Authority found sheer quantity of applicant’s response to allegation weakened submission that could not properly deal with allegation because of lack of specificity by respondent – Authority satisfied fair and reasonable employer would have reached decision to dismiss – Application dismissed – Dispatcher |