Sickness and the law of unfair dismissal

1981 ◽  
Vol 3 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 215-224
Author(s):  
Andrew Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law

Unfair dismissal in the Mauritius context: a comparative study

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 1299-1312
Author(s):  
Ambareen Beebeejaun
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Monetary Compensation ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Practical Recommendations

Purpose The purpose of this study is to critically analyse the concept of unfair dismissal and to assess the extent to which the Employment Rights Act 2008 is affording protection to employees in Mauritius. The purpose of this study is to also demonstrate that as employees form an integral part of their workplace, their employment cannot be terminated without substantive and procedural fairness. The paper will provide some recommendations to cater for loopholes in existing Mauritius employment legislations. Design/Methodology/Approach To critically examine the topic, the black letter approach is adopted to detail legislations and judgments of courts on the subject matter. A comparative analysis with some other jurisdictions’ employment legislations is also carried out to define, explain and examine the concepts of dismissal, substantive causes such as misconduct and procedural fairness. Findings From the methodologies used, it is found that a substantial reason is not sufficient to conclude whether a dismissal is fair. The law of unfair dismissal has introduced some procedural safeguards to protect the employee from being unfairly and unjustifiably dismissed. The procedural requirements act as guidelines to employers and if they are not followed properly, the dismissal will be unfair. Unfair dismissal needs to be accompanied by remedies from employers, and monetary compensation has been found to be the most appropriate remedy. Originality/Value This paper is amongst the first research work conducted in Mauritius that compares the law of unfair dismissal and its implications with the laws of England and South Africa. The study is carried out with a view to provide practical recommendations in this area of employment law to the relevant stakeholders concerned.

8. Employment II: termination—wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal, and redundancy

2019 ◽  
pp. 114-129
Author(s):  
James Marson ◽  
Katy Ferris
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Employment Contract ◽  
Contract Employees ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Wrongful Dismissal

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter reviews the law on the termination of the employment contract. Employees have a statutory right not to be unfairly dismissed and the Employment Rights Act (ERA) 1996 identifies the criteria to be satisfied in order for the employee to gain protection. The common law protects against wrongful dismissal and provides tests and guidance for situations involving a breach of an employment contract. The chapter also considers redundancy situations. As this is governed by statute, it is necessary to appreciate the obligations imposed on the employer to adopt fair procedures.

10. Industrial action

2019 ◽  
pp. 704-794
Author(s):  
Ian Smith ◽  
Aaron Baker ◽  
Owen Warnock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Industrial Action ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Many ◽  
Contractual Rights ◽  
The Impact

This chapter considers the law relating to strikes and other industrial action including the important changes made by the Trade Union Act 2016. It deals with the historical development of common law and statute in this field to illuminate the current law. The relevance of the European Convention on Human Rights is considered. The tortious and criminal liabilities flowing from industrial action are considered and the crucial immunity for tortious liability provided by the ‘golden formula’ including the exceptions to this immunity and the preconditions of complying with rules on balloting and notice of industrial action. Picketing is considered in relation to the many legal liabilities and the statutory immunity for some peaceful picketing. The granting of injunctions to stop industrial action is examined. The impact of industrial action on individual employees is considered in relation to their contractual rights and liabilities and the law of unfair dismissal.

Sickness and the law of unfair dismissal

1981 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-224
Author(s):  
Andrew Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law

9. Unfair dismissal

2021 ◽  
pp. 133-150
Author(s):  
Michael Jefferson
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the law on unfair dismissal. The principal cases are discussed in full. It is easy to get lost in the mass of case law and concentration must be kept on the statute and these leading cases. The employer must demonstrate that the reason for the dismissal relates to capability or qualifications, conduct, a statutory ban, or some other substantial reason of a kind to justify the dismissal. An employer must act reasonably in treating a reason as sufficient for dismissal. This is the famous ‘range of reasonable responses’ test. It should be guided by the ACAS Code of Practice 2015 and must follow contractual procedures. The remedies for unfair dismissal include re-employment or compensation.

Strikes and the Law of Unfair Dismissal

1980 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. W. Napier
Keyword(s):  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law

Incompatibility as a Ground for Dismissal in Contemporary South African Law of Unfair Dismissal: A Review of Zeda Car Leasing and Other Recent Cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-259
Author(s):  
Chuks Okpaluba ◽  
Tumo Charles Maloka
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Rugby Union ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law ◽  
Bear Witness

Although incompatibility is not listed along with incapacity, misconduct, or operational requirements in s 188(1)(a) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 as a ground for dismissal, in practice, it has been likened to all these statutorily laid down grounds to justify dismissal and abundant case law abound to bear witness to this assertion. A cursory reading of the cases of Zeda Car Leasing (Pty) Ltd t/a Avis Fleet v Van Dyk [2020] ZALAC 4; Mgijima v MEC, Department of Education, Gauteng [2014] ZALCJHB 414; Edcon Ltd v Padayachee [2018] ZALCJHB 307 and Watson v South African Rugby Union (SARU) [2017] ZALCJHB 264 where incompatibility was approached respectively, from the prism of operational requirements; incapacity and misconduct; coupled with some recent cases discussed herein, clearly indicate that incompatibility has not only covered the field, it has also acquired a pride of place in contemporary South African law of unfair dismissal. Given these circumstances, the authors recommend the insertion into s 188(1)(a)(i) by way of an amendment such that the subsection will include a fair reason ‘related to the employee’s conduct, incapacity or ‘‘incompatibility’’ ’. This will definitely clear any lingering doubts surrounding the role of incompatibility and empower the arbitrator and the Labour Court to adjudicate with a level of clarity in the law of unfair dismissal.

Redundancy in the Australian Public Service — Some Critical Reflections

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-555
Author(s):  
Cameron Roles
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
The Public ◽  
Individual Agency ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Critical Reflections

This article critically examines the law concerning dismissal on grounds of redundancy as it applies to the Australian Public Service (‘APS’). Such an examination is timely, given the newly elected Coalition government's stated intention to reduce the APS by 12 000 employees through natural attrition. The article argues that a reduction of 12 000 employees through natural attrition alone is unlikely, and that redundancies are almost inevitable. Against this backdrop, the article considers recent legislative developments concerning dismissal on grounds of redundancy. Its focus is the genuine redundancy exclusion contained in s 389 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (‘FW Act’) and its application to APS employment. The genuine redundancy exclusion precludes unfair dismissal claims if the redundancy is genuine, the employer complies with any consultation obligations in a modern award or enterprise agreement and it would not have been reasonable in all the circumstances to redeploy the affected employee within the employer's enterprise or that of an associated entity. The article argues that, prior to the FW Act, redundancy obligations were predominantly dealt with in collective agreements, and did not require consultations or redeployment of redundant employees beyond the individual agency. However the FW Act fundamentally changed the law in this area. The article contends that a failure to comply with consultation obligations in an agency enterprise agreement will increase the prospects of a dismissal being found to be unfair. In the APS this is problematic, given the convoluted nature of many consultation clauses in enterprise agreements. The article also argues that the redeployment obligations in s 389(2) are extremely broad and, contrary to past practice under the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth) (‘PS Act’), encompass redeployment across the APS. The obligation to redeploy across the APS creates tensions in the law between the provisions of the FW Act and the devolution of managerial powers under the PS Act.

Reconstructing the Law of Unfair Dismissal

1988 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-24
Author(s):  
B. W. Napier
Keyword(s):  
Unfair Dismissal ◽  
The Law
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document