SCSLD 431/1/466/2010

An employee asked for an apology letter for having been accused of theft, reinstatement and paid compensation. The company stated the employee had not been dismissed as a result of theft but because they had refused to agree to a transfer. The apology letter was rejected but the other points were upheld.

Background

An employee filed a case against a company and requested the elementary authority for the settlement of labour disputes to order the company to provide him with an apology letter for an accusation of theft, reinstate him in his job and pay compensation.

The elementary authority ruled that the employee should be reinstated and that the company should pay him compensation and provide an apology letter.

The company appealed the ruling before the High Authority for the Settlement of Labour Disputes.

Decision

The high authority stated the employee had been informed by a transfer notice to the headquarter of the company. The high authority stated the company did not dismiss the employee from his job because of a theft but because he had refused to follow the transfer decision.

The high authority abandoned the first point in the elementary ruling and upheld other points.