| Summary |
UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious misconduct – Applicant employed part time and completed timesheets to record hours of work – Applicant received final written warning for falsifying timesheet – Ten months later, co-worker (“A”) advised respondent that applicant not at work, inconsistent with timesheet – In disciplinary interview, applicant stated worked several hours that day – Applicant then retracted and claimed at work for few minutes but completed timesheet incorrectly by mistake – Applicant’s support person (“J”) claimed applicant confused about day in question – Respondent dismissed applicant for serious misconduct – Applicant accepted discrepancy between hours worked and hours recorded on timesheet – Authority rejected applicant’s argument that dismissed to make position available for A’s relative – Authority rejected applicant’s argument that dismissal was unjustified because respondent’s process for completion of timesheets flawed – Applicant claimed J should have been permitted to participate more actively in disciplinary meeting – Authority found respondent entitled to seek applicant’s account of events from applicant himself – Found J not entitled to suggest an account to respondent, but only to assist in making applicant’s account clearer – Found restriction on J’s participation in meeting procedural flaw, but not sufficient to render dismissal unjustified – Found applicant’s only explanation for incorrect completion of timesheet was that was accident – Found applicant had below average IQ and suffered difficulties – Found worksite was small depot without on-site supervisor, so employer entitled to rely on applicant to complete timesheets correctly – Found applicant shown could not be relied upon to observe obligations – Dismissal justified - Deconsolidator |