Tribunal Decision – Leave Abuse

In an unfair dismissal claim, Mr Warren Mallia vs Malta Freeport Terminal Limited, the Industrial Tribunal delved into abuse of sick leave and whether this would justify termination of employment.

Mr. Mallia, who was on sick leave, was recommended by the company doctor to go outside. He visited his cousin’s house, where his brother was working, but Mr Mallia claimed he did not perform any manual labour himself. However, an HR employee reported seeing him doing manual work while on sick leave. This led to the company’s Disciplinary Board and the Appeals Board’s decision to terminate Mr Mallia’s employment. Mr. Mallia then filed a case for unjust dismissal, seeking reinstatement and/or compensation.

The Tribunal decided that, even though his medical certificate allowed the plaintiff to go outside, doing manual work while on sick leave as an abuse of sick leave.

Case highlights on sick leave abuse:

• The Industrial Tribunal acknowledged that sick leave is exclusively for health needs.
• The Tribunal highlighted the significant costs and operational disruptions caused by sick leave, especially in a competitive international market, and concluded that any compensation should be mitigated due to this abuse.
• The company failed to prove that Mr. Mallia was doing part-time work, as there was no evidence of payment for the manual work. This led to the conclusion that the dismissal was unfair. However, Mr. Mallia’s actions contributed to his dismissal.

Case highlights on safeguarding of physical and mental health:

• Mr. Mallia feared retaliation if he mentioned his cousin during disciplinary proceedings because the HR official who reported him was on bad terms with Mr Mallia’s cousin. The Tribunal also acknowledged the importance of a peaceful work environment for employees’ physical and mental health.

The Tribunal concluded:

• The employees disciplinary record of a written warning nine years prior, four internal memos over six years, and a verbal warning two months before the incident, did not justify the proportionality of his dismissal.
• While Mr. Mallia’s actions contributed to his dismissal, the Tribunal ultimately ruled the dismissal as unjust.