This means they are not: able to work out their notice period paid out for their notice period. Misconduct outside work Misconduct outside work could lead to disciplinary action or dismissal if: the conduct damaged the relationship of trust and confidence between the employee and employer, or the conduct brought the employer into disrepute, or the conduct is not appropriate for the employee to be doing their job properly.
Employee actions outside of work Employees who behave badly outside of work may be at risk of dismissal if their actions can be linked back to their work and cause concern for their employer. Tools and Resources Subscribe to our email newsletter Receive news and updates each month from Employment New Zealand.
Other links you might find useful Dismissal Disciplinary action. How helpful was this information? Additional comments. Still haven't found what you're looking for? Please note that this content will change over time and may be out of date. With gross misconduct, you can dismiss the employee immediately as long as you follow a fair procedure.
You should investigate the incident and give the employee a chance to respond before deciding to dismiss them.
An informal discussion may be enough to resolve the issue if the misconduct or underperformance was a one-off and the employee has a good disciplinary record.
Check what you need to do. To help us improve GOV. It will take only 2 minutes to fill in. Cookies on GOV. UK We use some essential cookies to make this website work. Accept additional cookies Reject additional cookies View cookies. By contrast, the default position is that Disciplinary Tribunal hearings are held in public, with the parties appearing in-person or through counsel before the Disciplinary Tribunal.
This reflects the policy decision that standards committees deal with matters of unsatisfactory conduct only, whereas the Disciplinary Tribunal also deals with more serious matters ie, misconduct where evidence is examined and tested in a quasi-court setting and considerations of open justice prevail. This distinction also has implications in terms of publication of decisions. The statutory presumption is that standards committee decisions remain confidential to the parties, unless a standards committee directs publication as it considers necessary or desirable in the public interest section 2.
By contrast Disciplinary Tribunal decisions are, in the absence of any order to the contrary, publicly available. This is indicative of the importance of more serious disciplinary matters being in the public domain, and is consistent with two of the purposes of the LCA - to maintain public confidence in the provision of legal services, and to protect the consumers of legal services section 3 1 of the LCA.
As noted above, standards committees can only make findings of unsatisfactory conduct; it is the Disciplinary Tribunal that has sole jurisdiction to make a misconduct finding against a lawyer following referral by a standards committee. There is no threshold for a standards committee to refer a matter to the Disciplinary Tribunal and the Disciplinary Tribunal can make findings against a lawyer of unsatisfactory conduct as well as misconduct.
While there is no threshold to refer a matter to the Disciplinary Tribunal, a degree of pragmatism is sometimes viewed as appropriate. A standards committee may decide to refrain from referring a matter to the Disciplinary Tribunal if were the matter to be referred the prosecuting standards committee would not be seeking a sanction of suspension from practice or strike-off from the roll of barristers and solicitors. A contrary view, of course, might be that all instances of prima facie misconduct ought to be referred to, and prosecuted by a standards committee before the Disciplinary Tribunal with all mitigating circumstances and the like to be assessed by the Disciplinary Tribunal rather than the standards committee.
The complaints may for example involve complex issues of law or fact or be likely to result in a significant precedent In contrast to criminal proceedings which reflect adversely upon the individual offender , breaches of professional standards may reflect upon the whole profession.
The public as well as members of the legal profession are entitled to scrutinise the manner in which lawyers are disciplined, because it is the profession in which the public must have confidence if lawyers are to properly provide the necessary legal services to the public Daniels v Complaints Committee 2 of the Wellington District Law Society CIV High Court Wellington, 8 August at [34].
When setting a penalty, the starting point is fixed according to the gravity of the unsatisfactory conduct or misconduct, as well as the culpability of the lawyer for the particular breach of professional standards. Thereafter, a balancing exercise is required to factor in mitigating circumstances and other considerations Daniels at [28]. As the High Court has said Daniels at [28] and [29] :. This can, however, extend to a failure to follow relevant procedures which may relate to work health and safety.
Site Search:. Watch our Video. The importance of getting it right: The difference between poor performance and employee misconduct. Published by Private: Nicola Martin. August 28,
0コメント