Security guard who slept on job loses dismissal case
A security guard who was fired after he was found asleep on duty at a primary care centre in Dublin has lost his unfair dismissal case, writes Darragh McDonagh.
Amen Kifle had argued at an adjudication hearing of the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) that he had merely closed his eyes due to a migraine and was not asleep.
However, the hearing was told Mr Kifle had admitted to falling asleep in a signed statement after the incident, and a supervisor had had to knock on a door for a full minute before the security guard let him in.
Mr Kifle had been employed by Synergy Security Solutions for over a year when a compliance officer visited a primary care centre in Coolock at 5.30am last July, and reported finding the security guard asleep on duty.
In his evidence to the WRC, he described himself as a punctual and reliable worker with an unblemished record, who was frequently flexible with his hours to accommodate his employer’s needs.
Mr Kifle said that he had been working a 13-hour shift without a break and began suffering from a migraine on the morning in question.
He claimed to have taken medication and briefly closed his eyes due to light sensitivity and pain.
He also raised concerns over inconsistent treatment, claiming a colleague who had been caught sleeping on the job on two occasions merely received a warning and was later promoted.
He also complained that he had been subjected to "excessive" working hours, claiming that he had been required to work seven consecutive days without a break, and alleged that he’d been questioned inappropriately about his religion by a supervisor.
Synergy Security Solutions told the WRC that Mr Kifle had initially admitted to sleeping on duty during the subsequent investigation.
The company said it had a “zero-tolerance” policy regarding sleeping on the job. It argued that the decision to dismiss Mr Kifle for gross misconduct had followed a fair investigation and full appeal process.
The sanction of dismissal was entirely proportionate given the nature of the misconduct involved, it claimed.
In his decision, WRC adjudication officer Dónal Moore said the company had provided documented and consistent evidence of an admission by Mr Kifle that he had been asleep on duty. He preferred this evidence over subsequent denials.
Mr Moore said the company’s procedures were robust and the loss of trust in the employee following the incident had justified termination, noting that a strict policy on sleeping was justified by the nature of the security industry.
He concluded that Mr Kifle’s complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 was not well founded, and a number of other issues raised regarding working hours and discrimination were outside his jurisdiction as they had not been formally referred to the WRC.
