In Jay Britchett’s termination case, there are several issues revolving around contract law and the law of tort. To commence with, there is the issue of obedience. This obligation rests on the employees as they are expected to obey requests from their employers. This issue transpired when Mr. Clearvagette ordered Mr. Britchett to leave his sister alone during the Christmas break-up party. Another relevant issue is the one on employee’s liability for torts accorded at common law. An employee is under obligation to ensure that they do not cause harm to others during the course of their employment. The issue arises when Mr. Britchett makes over-friendly advances to Gloria. Did his actions cause any harm to Gloria?
Unfair dismissal from employment has also emerged among the relevant issues in this case. The grounds that have resulted in Mr. Britchett dismissal seem to be unjust, harsh and unreasonable. What would have been the case if Britchett was expressing over-friendly advances to a colleague that was not the general manager’s sister? Would he have suffered similar consequences? There is an element of discrimination and desire to show superiority on the part of the general manager. The issue to do with breach of contract is also relevant in this case. This issue is evident on the notice period provided by the general manager. The period involved is not consistent with the period included in the employment contract.
Several legal principles are available in relation to the issues outlined above. On the issue of obedience, the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth), s7 requires employees to obey reasonable and lawful orders
To view this post and other posts in this category please pay the amount below