Sentences with phrase «dishonest employees in»

A survey of 23 major retailers found they apprehended 71,095 dishonest employees in 2012, according to Jack L. Hayes International's Annual Retail Theft Survey.

Not exact matches

For drivers, Campbell says this manifests itself in a feeling of expandability and a lack of structural recourse when dealing with dishonest reviews or comments from passengers, while employees like Fowler alleged that Uber's HR bungled her harassment claims.

In fact, each dishonest employee case that a retailer faces amounts to an average loss of $ 1,233.77, according to the NRSS.

In Luke 16, we have this dishonest employee who cheats his boss, and Jesus praises him for it.

Again, lower - class subjects whose attitudes toward greed had been nudged in this way became just as likely as their wealthier counterparts to sympathize with dishonest behavior (taking home office supplies, laying off employees while increasing their own bonuses, overcharging customers to drive up profits).

«There is no excuse for the disgraceful, dishonest practices that appeared to have run rampant among a group of employees at the school for several years,» Ingram also wrote in a post on his official blog.

The ferocity of National Grid's pursuit of its former employees is emphasised by the fact that it claimed a sum of # 5.26 m plus costs, which the judge found to be far in excess of what the defendants were alleged to have received from their dishonest activities.

The Court held that the revelation of character cases can be roughly divided into three categories: i) where misconduct is extremely serious, sometimes bordering on criminal acts (e.g. theft or fraud), just cause for termination will usually exist; ii) where conduct reveals deceit, misrepresentation or misleading of employers, cause will likely be found; and iii) where there are errors in judgment or a failure to follow rules, it can not automatically be said that the employee was dishonest for the purposes of justifying summary dismissal.

In giving a pass to dishonest employees, this case forced judges and arbitrators in summary dismissal cases today to conclude that the misconduct must show that «the employment relationship could no longer viably subsist.&raquIn giving a pass to dishonest employees, this case forced judges and arbitrators in summary dismissal cases today to conclude that the misconduct must show that «the employment relationship could no longer viably subsist.&raquin summary dismissal cases today to conclude that the misconduct must show that «the employment relationship could no longer viably subsist.»

-- Hanco ATM Systems v. Cashbox ATM Systems [2007] EWHC 1599 (Ch): Led by Andrew Hochhauser Q.C. in relation to summary judgment application against senior employee for breach of fiduciary duty and dishonest assistance and involving issues as to the doctrine of «preparatory steps».

In addressing the employee's dishonesty, the Court noted that «there is a significant difference, particularly when considering cause for termination, between an employee being dishonest with an employer and an employee giving an opinion, even an overly optimistic opinion, that turns out to be wrong.»

In some industries and for specific jobs, honesty is of paramount importance and an employee's dishonest conduct can result in summary termination of employment for just causIn some industries and for specific jobs, honesty is of paramount importance and an employee's dishonest conduct can result in summary termination of employment for just causin summary termination of employment for just cause.

Such a stretch of the decision in 1997 of Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in compulsory liquidation [1997] 3 All ER 1 (concerning a duty not to run a corrupt and dishonest business so as to damage the employees» future employment prospects) was denied in Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2001] UKHL 13 by the Court of Appeal and then the House of Lords, which considered it unnecessary to develop the common law to overlap this remedy.

Represented financial institution in obtaining multi-million dollar recoveries on fidelity bond claims involving dishonest employees and fraudulent instruments.

Recent matters include successfully defending a mesothelioma claim made by a former employee of the client, and acting for Markerstudy in the successful dismissal of personal injury claims that were found to be fundamentally dishonest.

Employees who have been fired for just cause based on allegations that they engaged in some type of dishonest conduct represent the most common type of justification for summary dismissal.

In summary, the Court concluded that, unless the employer's direction is illegal, dishonest or would risk the employee's safety, the employee must follow the direction.

The majority noted that it is not dishonest to insist that an employee meets a condition precedent in order to gain a benefit under a contract, nor to require that a party perform a contract in accordance with its terms.

Here the Ontario Court of Appeal held that because the employee's actions were not mere errors in judgment, but intentional, numerous, dishonest acts that occurred over a period of time, and that were neither insignificant nor trivial, and given his role in the company, the employee was in breach of the employer's policies and therefore he was properly dismissed for cause.

In that case, the Supreme Court of Canada considered whether any instance of dishonesty by an employee could be grounds for a just cause termination, or whether the context of the dishonest act is relevant.

Because of this high degree of importance, the single dishonest act was sufficiently damaging to the employment relationship in that it destroyed the trust between the employer and employee, and Atomic Energy rightfully dismissed the employee on a for cause basis.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently ruled in Aboagye v Atomic Energy of Canada that an employee's single dishonest act justified dismissal for cause because it went to the core of the employment relationship.

For example, you can purchase several types of fidelity bonds, either to protect the business in the event of dishonest acts by all employees, or by named employees.

Investigated and apprehended dishonest employees, vendors, shoplifters, and others who are in violation of company policies and procedures.