After four decades of loyal service, a HEMA store manager was met with immediate dismissal for allegedly stealing a pair of pyjamas. A court found she was treated unfairly.
As reported by AD, the employee in question was initially suspected of partially falsifying her hours when her theft of a pair of pyjamas sealed the deal.
An innocent mistake
Due to health concerns, the woman worked part-time from 9 AM to 1 PM. She would log the rest of her hours as sick leave (from 1 PM to 6 PM).
In court, the woman claimed that she logged her hours based on store opening times (9 AM to 6 PM), and made the innocent mistake of forgetting to account for a one-hour break daily. As such, her log of five hours of sick leave a day, rather than four, was accidental.
Corporate espionage? Really?
Due to the false hours being logged, HEMA hired a corporate investigator to investigate the employee for further wrongs.
After reviewing security footage, the super-spy saw the woman take the aforementioned pyjamas.
The footage revealed that she took the pyjamas to the cashier, who let them sit on the counter for a while. Some time later, the dismissed employee took them without paying.
This theft, in addition to the suspected time-sheet fraud, was enough for HEMA to fire the employee immediately.
Judge sides with the underdog
The woman took her case to court, which proved to be a wise choice. The judge sided with her, indicating that HEMA had acted rashly without proper evidence or investigation.
READ MORE | Unfair dismissal in the Netherlands: What you need to know
As the woman was never questioned regarding her suspected timesheet fraud, and the cashier was never questioned regarding the pyjamas, a summary and immediate dismissal could not be justified.
Essentially, HEMA jumped the gun — or rather, put on their pyjamas before the day was over.
The judge argued that for an employee of such longevity and loyalty, the complete lack of corrective feedback or direct communication is unacceptable.
Employee remains loyal
The court annulled the dismissal, reversing HEMA’s decision entirely. Despite the ordeal, however, the employee chose not to terminate the contract in court.
The woman indicated a desire to work till retirement. We only hope she receives better treatment this time around.
Do you think HEMA was in the right? Let us know in the comments!
To me It looks like payment for PI would cost more than 1 pijama or those hours. All well may be that she wanted to pay for pijamas but somehow it got forgotten. Now in addition – HEMA need to pay court fees. …
Hema is dead to me. full boycott