A man who was sacked for taking a tube of glue from currency printing company De La Rue, after more than 32 years of service, has had his appeal before the industrial tribunal turned down.
His sacking follows that of another two men who had been previously dismissed because they had stolen a pen and pipe respectively.
The tribunal upheld the zero tolerance policy of De La Rue Currency and Security Print Limited.
Being a security firm, dealing in the printing of cash, the company has a number of strict policies in place. One of them is that no employee is allowed to move items from one department to another without prior permission.
In this case, former security officer Publius Davison said he had borrowed the tube of glue to fix something he had in his locker.
He placed it in the breast pocket of his uniform but had forgotten about it because he got caught up doing some other work. It was found in his possession after having gone missing.
The company’s human resources manager, Ronald Bonnici, testified that Mr Davison was caught taking the glue on CCTV footage.
He said this was a special type of glue that costs more than €53.
He said the security at the company was so tight that even if someone took something that was being thrown away, prior permission had to be sought.
The tribunal, presided over by lawyer Martin Fenech, heard that Mr Davison had worked for the company for more than 32 years and had started as a printer before became a security officer.
He had no serious disciplinary action taken against him during his time with the company.
When other employees had realised this glue had gone missing from next to one of the printers, the chief of security asked to watch the CCTV footage. Mr Davison was seen taking the glue and placing it in his pocket.
Mr Davison admitted to taking it to fix something he had in his locker and when confronted, he fainted. He later admitted to not having sought permission before taking the item – despite knowing the premises were covered with security cameras and knowing the company’s security policies.
The tribunal ruled that the company was justified in sacking Mr Davison because as a security officer, he had done something he was duty bound to prevent.
Moreover, it said, he should have known better, especially after working for the company for so long.
Lawyer Robert Abela appeared for Mr Davison while the company was represented by lawyer Andrew Borg Cardona.