Background
In Jason v Bobmil Industries Ltd [2024] KEELRC 2504 (KLR), the Respondent’s witness testified that the Claimant was not subjected to a disciplinary process due to the intimidating circumstances surrounding his status as a licensed gun holder.
The witness alleged that the Claimant frequently carried his firearm into the Respondent's premises and displayed it in an intimidating manner, including placing the gun on the table during discussions, creating an atmosphere of fear. The witness also stated that no formal grievance was reported to management regarding this behaviour.
In his defence, the Claimant testified that he was specifically hired because he was a gun holder and that during his recruitment interview, he was instructed to always report for duty with his firearm.
This assertion was not rebutted by the Respondent during the proceedings.
The Court's Determination:
The court found that the Respondent had failed to undertake a proper disciplinary process concerning the allegations of lateness, absenteeism, or intimidating conduct as a gun holder.
Furthermore, the court noted that the termination letter issued to the Claimant did not reference intimidation as a reason for the dismissal.
As a result, the Respondent could not rely on this claim to justify bypassing the disciplinary process.
The court concluded that the Respondent’s failure to address the alleged misconduct through established disciplinary procedures rendered the termination procedurally unfair.
Read Full Case Here
No comments:
Post a Comment