Theft at work: Both the labor court and the regional labor court in Düsseldorf (5 Sa 483/20) rejected. In the present case, the theft of disinfectants and paper towels led to a justified termination without notice.
facts
The plaintiff had been employed by a parcel delivery company since 2004, the defendant as a loader, unloader and washer for the vehicles. During a random exit check, the works security found an unopened plastic bottle with a liter of disinfectant and a towel roll (value: approx. 40 euros) in the plaintiff’s trunk. At that time it happened again and again from the defendant employer that disinfectants were stolen. The works council approved the plaintiff’s termination without notice, which the defendant then pronounced. The plaintiff’s dismissal protection suit was unsuccessful.
So argued the worker
The plaintiff alleged that he went to his vehicle every hour during work to disinfect and dry his hands. He wanted to use the product for himself and possibly his colleagues, especially since it was not always available in the washrooms. When he left, he didn’t think about the things in the trunk. He doesn’t have to steal a disinfectant because his wife works in the care and the family is adequately provided for by her.
The employer forbade disinfectants to be taken
The defendant alleged that the plaintiff had told works security that he was allowed to take the disinfectant with him in order to disinfect his hands on the way. However, with notices in the sanitary area, she indicated that taking disinfectants with you would result in termination without notice and notification.
Termination without notice: There was an important reason
The State Labor Court (LAG) Düsseldorf, like the Labor Court, dismissed the dismissal protection suit. There is an important reason for termination without notice. The plaintiff’s statements are not credible. The chamber assumes that the plaintiff appropriated the disinfectant in order to use it himself. If he wanted to use it during the shift, it would have made sense to put the disinfectant on the material trolley at the workplace, especially since only six to seven colleagues worked during the night. It is also incomprehensible that he wanted to use the disinfectant for his colleagues too, because he had neither told them where to store the disinfectant nor gave them the car key so that they could use it. After all, the bottle that was found had not been opened.
Despite the long period of employment, no prior warning was required. At a time of the pandemic when disinfectants were in short supply and knowing that the defendant was also struggling with supply bottlenecks, the plaintiff stole a significant amount of disinfectant. At the same time, he accepted that his colleagues would go away empty-handed. Therefore, it had to be clear to him that by stealing a liter of disinfectant he was jeopardizing the continued existence of his employment. (Source: press release from the court)
–
