Dismissed for a trivial item after 11 years of service
A baker with an unblemished 11-year record is fired on the spot for taking a trivial item from the company kitchen — and wins at the labor tribunal on the grounds of disproportionate dismissal.
Premiumfoundational8 minutes
The Situation
What They Said
“Under the applicable labor law, dismissal must be proportionate to the offence. Taking a trivial item after 11 years of clean service does not meet the threshold for gross misconduct. My dismissal is substantively unfair under the relevant labor law.”
You have worked as a baker for the same company for 11 years with no prior disciplinary record. One afternoon, you took a trivial item from the company kitchen to use for personal purposes — something you had seen colleagues do. Your employer reviewed surveillance footage and dismissed you on the spot for theft. You earn a modest monthly salary and have a family to support. Your employer says the dismissal stands because 'theft is theft, no exceptions.'
The Fallacy
Theft Is Always Gross Misconduct — Instant Dismissal With No Exception
Employers often apply a blanket rule that any theft equals instant dismissal. But this misapplies the law. The applicable labor law requires employers to consider the gravity of the offence, the employee's disciplinary record, their length of service, and the value of what was taken before deciding on dismissal. Labor tribunals have consistently held that dismissal for minor theft after many years of loyal service is disproportionate and therefore substantively unfair. 'Theft is theft' is not a valid legal defence for an obviously disproportionate sanction.
What the Law Says
Your Legal Foundation
Ley de Contrato de Trabajo 20.744
art. 242 de la Ley de Contrato de Trabajo — Proportionality in dismissal
“The assessment must be made prudentially by the judges, taking into account the nature of the relationships arising from an employment contract, as provided in this law, and the modalities and personal circumstances in each case.”
Your dismissal for taking a teaspoon of sugar, after 11 years of clean service, must be assessed prudentially considering your personal circumstances and the trivial nature of the act, which does not constitute grave injury justifying termination.
What Scripture Says
God's Word on This
()
“Dishonest scales are an abomination to the LORD, but accurate weights find favour with him.”
The law requires that punishment match the offence. A dismissal after 11 years of faithful service for an item of negligible value is a false balance — a sanction so disproportionate it becomes injustice. The labor tribunal exists to correct exactly this kind of imbalance.
🔒
You Know the Law — But Do You Know What to Say?
Reading your rights is one thing. Using them under pressure — calmly, correctly, in the right words — is what actually protects you. Members get the scripted rebuttal for this exact situation: what to say first, what to say if they push back, the tone to use, and the constitutional provision to cite. Practise out loud with audio until it's automatic.