Written warnings and disciplinary dismissal: documenting it so it stands

The written warning is the first degree of penalty, and its function is to inform the employee of the breach and allow a chance to correct before anything harsher; in absence cases it is a condition that cannot be dispensed with before dismissal.

An establishment that dismisses an employee for continuous or intermittent absence without a documented written warning leaves the dismissal liable to be set aside, because Article 80 requires a written warning after twenty days of intermittent absence and after ten days of continuous absence.

A verbal warning does not stand in for a written one however often repeated, since what is required is a dated document proving the employee knew what was alleged.

A warning that survives scrutiny states six things, and the absence of any of them opens the door to dispute:

An employee may not be charged with a breach discovered more than thirty days earlier, nor may a penalty be imposed more than thirty days after the breach was established, so an establishment that stayed silent or investigated slowly loses its right.

A penalty may not be escalated on repetition where one hundred and eighty days have passed since the previous breach counted from the date the employee was notified of it, so the repetition counter resets with time.

Both deadlines require every warning to carry a recorded notification date, because the count runs from notification rather than from when the breach occurred.

Dismissal without gratuity, notice, or compensation is confined to the Article 80 cases alone, being specific situations such as assault, failure to perform essential obligations, acts touching honour and honesty, disclosure of secrets, and absence within the prescribed limits.

It is not the next degree after warning and fine but a separate track with its own conditions, so an employee whose case does not fall within Article 80 is not dismissed under it however often they have breached.

Its two procedural conditions are that the employee be given the opportunity to state their reasons and that the dissolution occur within the period prescribed from when the incident was established, and skipping either voids the dismissal.

Termination without lawful cause is not itself a breach, since an employer may end the contract, but it costs compensation of fifteen days' wage per year of service in an indefinite contract and the wage for the remaining term in a fixed-term one.

Article 80 dismissal carries neither compensation nor gratuity, which is why some establishments try to characterise an ordinary termination as a disciplinary dismissal, and that is the most dangerous thing they can do, because a failed characterisation brings gratuity, compensation, and payment in lieu of notice down on them together.

The practical rule is that disciplinary dismissal is used where the evidence is complete and the procedure was fully observed, and short of that, ordinary termination with its compensation is cheaper and far safer.

Warnings, minutes, and dismissal decisions are not papers filed for reference: they are evidence needed by whoever defends the establishment a year or two later, and their value lies in being tied to the incident, its date, and who issued them.

When they sit in the employee file inside the system, linked to the attendance record proving the absence or lateness and to an audit log showing who issued what and when, the file comes out complete in minutes rather than being assembled from messages and folders.