Author: Dennis Chapman
Published: September 2, 2013
Reading time: 2 minutes
This article is 12 years old.
Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down
This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.
The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.
The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.
Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.
If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.
All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.
Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.
In a recent case at the Employment Tribunal, a car dealer was made to pay over £10,000 to an ex employee that they had dismissed.
The Claimant claimed that he had been dismissed on the grounds of age discrimination as he was 52 years of age. The Claimant was the oldest member of staff at the site where he worked, and was dismissed by his manager after being told that his career was over because he was “too old”.
The Manager in question had already fired 2 other members of staff that day and was “on a roll” when he dismissed the Claimant. The Respondent denied these claims and stated that the Claimant was dismissed as he had failed to motivate his team and had failed to train them correctly.
The award was also given on the basis that the Respondent Company had not followed the correct procedure. The Claimant was called into the manager’s office at 6pm on a Saturday, had a 2 minute conversation and was told to leave the site.
The lesson here is that performance issues must be dealt with through the correct capability assessment procedure. It is key to monitor performance on a continuous basis, and discuss any lack of performance or negligent performance with an employee in a formal environment, you can rely of these meetings at a later date if required.
