There are
many of the issues related to employment law that occur in this case. First issue related to the stealing and
missing of money in the Cafeteria that is causing a lot of tension for Adam as
the returns are less than the receipt he gets from the customers. The suspecting
of the fraud employee is also very difficult because the staff in the Cafeteria
do their job part time and work in rotation. The second issues rise when the
behavior of one of the staff member Jane seems a bit suspicious and Adam also
get them to know about the behavior of Jane from one of his employees. In this case Jane is seems to be the most
likely guilty of fraud happened. The main issues are that Adam has not any
solid prove and evidence, to take any action against the Jane. Adam just gets the remarks about the behavior
of Jane through words of mouth from another staff member (Equalityhumanrights.com, 2017).
The third
issues rise when Adam get to know that the Jane is pregnant and want to
maternity leave. Now the Adam might not be able to take this issue further with
Jane because of her condition. Now in
this situation the Adam would not be able to dismiss the Jane and investigate
the case of misconduct because now she can also file case against the Adam for dismissing
her because of pregnancy. The situation has become very awkward for the Adam
because the Gross misconduct and maternity issue in the case. Jane can also
file the cased of sex discrimination against the Adam taking advantage of her pregnancy
(Gov.uk, 2013).
It is
quite obvious that disciplinary action cannot be taken against the Jane because
of her pregnancy and maternity leave absence. The employer may carry out
disciplinary act against an employee through maternity leave or pregnancy, so
it is concerned to keep away from discrimination and is confident that the disciplinary
action of the misconduct in the workplace is appropriate in the situation. It is said to be very important for
the Adam in this situation to follow a fair process, as well as also keep in
mind the Jane can also put her case against the Adam in court (Handrick, 2017).
The problem
in the case is that Adam not has any major evidence against the Jane and he is
also not very sure about the staff member who is the reason behind the whole
misconduct in the Cafeteria. Adam need to so more investigation for this case
in order to get proof against the Jane regarding the misconduct. The employer
has the right to discharge any worker, in case of fraud and theft of
money. In the Adams case even though
Jane is the more likely staff members in workplace to steal the money by Adams
not have any kind of proof against Jane(Equalityhumanrights.com, 2017).
References of Issues and Problems of Legal Aspects of Business
Aitken, Oscar. 2016. Chile: What Happens When An
Employer Uncovers Employee Fraud? July 14. http://www.mondaq.com/x/509442/employee+rights+labour+relations/What+Happens+When+An+Employer+Uncovers+Employee+Fraud.
Doobay, Anand. 2009. UK: The Fraud Act 2006: An
Update. December 3.
http://www.mondaq.com/uk/x/90240/White+Collar+Crime+Fraud/The+Fraud+Act+2006+An+Update.
Equalityhumanrights.com. 2017. What is the
Equality Act? October 30.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act-2010/what-equality-act.
Gov.uk. 2013. Equality Act 2010: guidance.
February 27. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance.
Handrick, Laura. 2017. Small Business Maternity
Leave Policy & Laws – With Examples. November 20.
https://fitsmallbusiness.com/maternity-leave-policy/.