Chronic lateness: problems related to family obligations are not a valid excuse

Release date: August 1st, 2008

A housekeeping attendant with over 24 years’ seniority challenges the 3-week suspension and the dismissal applied to him due to his repeated lateness. Earlier uncontested 3- and 8-day suspensions for the same reasons had already been applied. During a period of just over a year, the employee had arrived late 60 times. Even if these late arrivals had no effect in terms of the work actually done, the employer has the right to expect an employee to report to work according to his or her work schedule, and it is up to the employee to take whatever means are necessary to achieve this. Justifying absence and lateness on the basis of parental responsibilities does not constitute a valid excuse. The employee had been warned of the consequences if he continued to arrive late at work. Consequently, the 3 week suspension and dismissal were justified.. Syndicat des travailleuses et travailleurs de Louis-H. Lafontaine Gouin-Rosemont v. Louis-H. Lafontaine Hospital (D. S.), DTE 2007T-956 (T.A.) Me Nathalie Faucher


From bulletin Gestion Plus
To suscribe, click here!

Back to the list
To the exclusive service of employers

To the exclusive service of employers, Le Corre offers training workshops and publications on subjects solely pertaining to labour law. Both these tools help managers and human resources professionals to deal more effectively with the daily legal framework of their businesses.

Laval

450 973-4020

Toll free

1 877 218-4020

Fax

450 973-4010
By email