Boots Retail Limited v Luka Glogoski [2018]
Published on: 15/02/2018
Article Authors
The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
{}
Background
The complainant claimed that there were no real performance issues and described his personal performance as close to perfect.Ā He also alleged that there was insufficient time and inadequate support to complete tasks and achieve objectives, and that his dismissal was pre-determined and rushed. He placed great emphasis on the respondentās overly strict standards and expectations which he described in his written submissions as āimpossibleā, ānot practicalā and ānit-pickingā.
This case involved a claim for unfair dismissal by the complainant, a qualified pharmacist. The respondent company claimed that the complainant had been fairly dismissed for reasons of underperformance/ incompetence as at the time of the dismissal a final written warning of this nature was active on the complainant's file. The respondent also claimed that the complainant had received poor performance ratings in 6 of the 7 years preceding the termination, that he been placed on a formal performance improvement plan prior to his dismissal and that the dismissal had been carried out in accordance with the company's disciplinary policy.Ā
The complainant claimed that there were no real performance issues and described his personal performance as close to perfect.Ā He also alleged that there was insufficient time and inadequate support to complete tasks and achieve objectives, and that his dismissal was pre-determined and rushed. He placed great emphasis on the respondentās overly strict standards and expectations which he described in his written submissions as āimpossibleā, ānot practicalā and ānit-pickingā.
The Court found that the respondent was entitled to be concerned about the complainant's performance deficiencies and that an employer is entitled to determine their own standards and to attach their own importance to them. Accordingly, they held that the decision to dismiss the complainant for underperformance was fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Already a subscriber?
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
Disclaimer
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.
This article is correct at 15/02/2018
Recent Case Law
Soniya George v Talbot Group [2024]
21/01/2025
An Employee v An Employer [2024]
16/01/2025
Roberta Girinelli -v- Genius Limited
09/01/2025
Q&A
How to handle it
Legal Islandās LMS, licensed to you
Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised trainingĀ platform, tailored to your organisationās brand and staff trainingĀ needs, with unlimited users.
Learn more ā