Adams v Ryan

• Jurisdiction: Antigua and Barbuda
• Court: Industrial Court (Antigua)
• Judge: James, J.
• Judgment Date: 10 October 1979
• Date: 10 October 1979

Industrial Court

James, J. (Hearing Officer)

Adams

and

Ryan

(3) Appearances:

(a) For Worker:

Mr. H. Joseph – Industrial Officer, AWU.

Mr. C. Adams – Worker.

For Employer:

Mr. G. Ryan.

Industrial Law - Unfair dismissal — Worker reported for work late and was met by his employer who told him that he would not be working that day and that until he made up his mind to work he should not return — Court found that the evidence presented and the failure of the employer to give any explanation or reasons for the termination suggested that it was unwarranted — Awarded $1,250.00 for loss of employment.

(4) Place and date of Hearing: Labour Department, Wednesday 10 ^th October, 1979.

(5) A. Case for Worker:

B. Cross Examination:

1 The worker was dismissed on Tuesday in December in front of Hardware Plumbing Centre, but he was working at Fitches Creek. The day before he was dismissed, he reported to the pick-up point and informed a co-worker that he was going to the doctor. He reported for work after visiting the doctor. On reaching the site he met the employer just leaving. He was asked where he was going and he informed the employer that he was going to work. The retort was at this hour and the reply was yes. The employer then asked another question and the worker asked him what he meant by that. The worker was then informed that he would not be working that day. He left and went home.

(5) C. Summary:

2 The Employer spoke of tardiness and irregularity but these are irrelevant to the issue, which is wrongful dismissal. The worker pointed out that on or around 16 ^th December the incident occurred. He worked two weeks in December and the week on the pay sheet showing that he did not turn up for work was when his employer sent him home. He should have teen commended for leaving the doctor and going to work, but instead he was sent home for being late. On Tuesday the worker again reported for duty and there could be no complain about tardiness. He was involved in a discussion with some other workers when he was called by his employer who told him he was too argumentative so he was dismissed. He did not receive any monies that week. The worker was actually dismissed and should be compensated for unfair dismissal.

(6) A. Case fur Employer:

• (i) The employer stated that within the construction industry periods of lay-off occur intermittently. The worker, he said had grown accustomed to reporting late for duty. They were in the process of making forms for casting and were already behind schedule because of bad weather. On the Monday morning the worker was not present, so he stayed at the site until around 10 a.m.

• (ii) On leaving he saw an approaching car and noticed that the worker was in it. He stopped and reversed. He asked the worker where he was coming from and going to. The reply was that he had come to work. The employer informed him that he was not serious and it could not be at this time, in fact until he made up his mind that he wanted to work he should go home and with that he continued on his way.

• (ii) The worker reported for work the next day and in fact worked until the end of the week and never showed up again. He did not mean to improve his behaviour so he left on his own accord and from time to time he had come to work very irregularly. Compensation will not be considered but any vacation due will be given.

(6) A. Case fur Employer:

B. Cross Examination:

3 It was confirmed that the worker was told to make up his mind to refrain from absenteeism and then return. He turned out to work the next day. His name re-appeared on the pay sheet because no instructions had been given as he had...