In the world of professional driving, the safety of both passengers and road users is paramount. Breaking the rules not only jeopardizes lives, but it can also cost you your job, as was evidenced in the case of Mr. Janusz Tymoszuk versus ComfortDelgro Cabcharge Pty Ltd. T/A Westbus Region 1, often referred to as the CDC. Today, we’ll delve into this case to help our employees understand the consequences of flouting company policies and road safety rules.
On October 10, 2012, Mr. Tymoszuk, a bus driver, was dismissed from his role at the CDC due to serious misconduct – using a mobile phone while operating a bus. In reaction to his dismissal, Mr. Tymoszuk initiated an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission, Australia’s national workplace relations tribunal.
However, Deputy President Booth ruled in favor of the CDC. She determined that Mr. Tymoszuk’s actions constituted serious misconduct, and his dismissal was neither harsh, unjust, nor unreasonable. In essence, the application for unfair dismissal was dismissed, confirming the legitimacy of the company’s actions.
Interestingly, Mr. Tymoszuk did not deny using the phone in the way described or the fact that he was knowingly in breach of both the company’s mobile phone usage policy and road safety rules. He acknowledged that his employer had valid grounds for dismissal. However, he disputed the label of ‘serious misconduct’ and insisted that the circumstances surrounding his phone usage did not pose a safety risk.
These “extenuating circumstances” he referred to were concerns about his adult son’s welfare. However, Deputy President Booth considered this argument to be an embellishment to justify his inappropriate use of the phone, with his evidence appearing disingenuous at times.
From the evidence gathered, it was clear that Mr. Tymoszuk had compromised the safety of himself, his passengers, and other road users. He missed two scheduled bus stops while on his phone and was seen making contact with tree leaves on the roadside. Furthermore, he was caught staring down at his phone with his eyes off the road for a significant duration, emphasizing the risk of his actions.
Upon considering all aspects, Deputy President Booth concluded that the company’s decision to terminate Mr. Tymoszuk’s employment was justifiable and shouldn’t be disturbed by the Commission.
This case study is a stark reminder of the importance of adhering to company policies and road regulations, and the dire consequences that can ensue from neglecting these rules.
Call Frontline Employment Defenders Now so we can help you 1300 089 353 or visit https://www.fled.com.au
Read more: Ensuring Employee Compliance: A Case Study on the Importance of Adhering to Company Policies and Road Regulations