Company Profile Fiji International Telecommunications Limited (FINTEL) is a Private Company formed in December 1976 and licensed by Government to provide Fiji’s international telecommunications connectivity and terminations to the global and into the domestic network. The company is jointly owned by the Government of Fiji (51 percent) and Cable and Wireless Communications (www.cwc.com) of UK (49 percent).
introduction In these project will be discussing about a case study from the company Fiji International Telecommunications Limited (FINTEL) about the indiscipline and misconduct and how the company tries to solve the problem using their discipline procedures and how they lay the charges.
Case last year, an employee was found taking theIn December company vehicle to his premises (home). The employee was at work late hours and after finishing his job the employee took the company vehicle to his home without appealing for a approval or without legal approval. As stated in the employment contract no worker is allowed to take the company vehicle home for private use. The employee who took the vehicle home is a old service staff for the firm. The vehicle he took home was seen by the security guard. The security at work that saw the employee taking the vehicle home after hours reported to the matter to the Head of department of the employee’s section. Than the HOD dealt with the matter by collecting evidence that he took the vehicle or no, as he found the evidence about the particular incident than he took the matter to the HR (internal disclipnary Committee) of the company.The matter was later dealed by the HR and disciplinary action was taken against the employee.
Disciplinary Procedure containedin Collective Agreement Any disciplinary matter that is reported to HR is dealt with according to the following procedure: HR is notified by respective Head of Department HR Receives the compliant and acknowledges the receipt of it. Investigate the complaint using the organization guidelines and ERP2007 HR writes to accused 7 HOD explaining in details the issue that has been raised by the HOD and informing the accused that an investigation will be conducted. After investigation – report provided to Head of Department to state findings If the findings substantive the complaints provided by the Department than disciplinary process is provided At the last stage, if the investigation conducted concludes that there is no offence committed than no disciplinary action is provided or taken, but if the offence is created than disciplinary actions will be taken according to the companies’ guidelines.
Step by step undertaken by thecompnay Report was filled by the Head for department to manager HR HR advised the employee and conducted investigation At the completion of investigation, the employee was found to be in breach of policy by taking the vehicle home without proper approval Employee was advised via a memo of the offence and the penalty Employee appealed on the grounds that it was unfair Appeals committee presided over the appeals process End of the hearing, penalty remains as the committee was satisfied that the employee had breached the rules and regulation by taking the company vehicle without authority by the head of department.
Fairness From my point of view in the case from FINTEL I think the employee was given the procedural fairness to appeal to the case within the time frame of seven days. He was given seven days to appeal to his charge that was made on him. Even if there are valid substantive reasons for a dismissal, an employer must follow a fair procedure before dismissing the employee. Procedural fairness may in fact be regarded as the "rights" of the worker in respect of the actual procedure to be followed during the process of discipline or dismissal. The employee was given the grounds of fair and unfairness to appeal according to the companies’ disciplinary procedures. After that the hearing was made based on the appeal.
Recommendation for Proceduralfairness What would I have done in this case is: Procedural Fairness: MisconductThe following requirements for procedural fairness should be met: An employer must inform the employee of allegations in a manner the employee can understand The employee should be allowed reasonable time to prepare a response to the allegations The employee must be given an opportunity to state his/ her case during the proceedings An employee has the right to be assisted by a shop steward or other employee during the proceedings The employer must inform the employee of a decision regarding a disciplinary sanction, preferably in writing- in a manner that the employee can understand The employer must give clear reasons for dismissing the employee The employer must keep records of disciplinary actions taken against each employee, stating the nature of misconduct, disciplinary action taken and the reasons for the disciplinary action.
The Companies Penalty forbreach of policy: 1. Employee was advised not to drive company vehicle until further notice 2. A written memo was provided as first warning for breach of company vehicle. The hearing was not just in comparison with other employees.
In regards with the employment contract the company should have: Suspended the employee for certain days. Cut pay of the employee Banned for using company services for certain periods At last they could have also terminated the employee
Process for use of company vehicle after working hours: The Head of Department shall provide approval for use of company vehicle after hours. If any employee removes any company property without the HOD’s approval that is a breach of company policy which can also be constituted as theft.
Conclusion To conclude my whole project I would like to say that FINTEL was good in following the terms and conditions of ERP2007 to dealing with the Indiscipline/misconduct in their company. They have an organized disciplinary procedure, step by step process for dealing with the issue and the penalty for the breach of policy. In Fintel the code of good practice deals with some of the key aspects of dismissals for reasons related to conduct and capacity. It is intentionally general. Each case is unique, and departures from the norms established by this Code may be justified in proper circumstances. But the company was not committed much in common law while dealing with this case
RecommendationI would recommend that the organization should Change its disciplinary procedure while lying charges to the employees. Keep records for each employee specifying the nature of any disciplinary transgressions, the actions taken by the employer and the reasons for the actions Keep track all employees act in the organization And When deciding whether or not to impose the penalty of dismissal, the employer should not take in addition to the gravity such as : length of service, previous disciplinary record, personal circumstances, the nature of the job and The circumstances of the infringement itself.