Dismissal due to conduct and behaviour

Technical competence alone is not always enough. Cooperation, communication and compliance with reasonable instructions may also form part of the role.

Conduct and behaviour are not the same as technical job performance

An employee may perform their core duties correctly from a technical perspective and still face criticism about communication, cooperation, initiative or compliance with reasonable working arrangements.

The legal assessment depends on the precise allegation. An area for development requires a different approach from deliberate misconduct or conduct alleged to constitute an urgent cause.

Make the distinctionIs improvement possible, is culpable conduct alleged, or does the employer claim an immediate urgent cause?

Discussion about conduct and behaviour at work

Which legal route matches the allegation?

The employer must specify the conduct at issue, the applicable standard and the dismissal ground relied upon. Vague descriptions such as “negative” or “unsuitable” are difficult to assess without concrete examples.

Underperformance

If the issue concerns skills or behaviour that form part of the job requirements, clear expectations, timely feedback and usually a genuine opportunity to improve are required.

Unprofessional conduct or cooperation

Where cooperation, communication or an inflexible attitude is concerned, the employer must explain specifically what needs to change and why this can reasonably be expected of the employee.

Culpable conduct

Deliberate non-compliance with rules or instructions may amount to culpable conduct. Its seriousness, previous warnings and the employee’s personal circumstances must be taken into account.

Urgent cause

Summary dismissal may be possible only where there is a sufficiently serious urgent cause. The employer must then act without delay and communicate the reason immediately.

Discussing working arrangements and professional cooperation

What does the practical example show?

In the original case, an employee performed his security duties correctly from a technical perspective, but after a change of manager a dispute arose about initiative, inspections, internet use and interaction with colleagues.

The Court of Appeal considered not only individual tasks but also the professional conduct required by the role. Above all, the case shows that standards, feedback, guidance and the employee’s response must be assessed together.

Read about underperformance

Respond in these four steps

Ask for concrete examplesWhich conduct, date, standard and impact are being alleged?
Review the fileCan the expectations, feedback, warnings and support be demonstrated?
Respond professionallyCorrect factual inaccuracies and cooperate with reasonable improvement arrangements.
Assess the dismissal routeCompare improvement, contesting the allegations and negotiating a settlement agreement.

Ask for specific facts and a fair opportunity to improve

Ask in writing for examples, dates and the standard against which your conduct is being assessed. Respond objectively to incorrect allegations and record your own explanation.

Cooperate with reasonable arrangements or guidance, but have any improvement plan and dismissal proposal reviewed first.

Have the file reviewed

Help with negotiations