Worker fired over 3 loaves of bread

Charges against Jonathan Tavarwisa are that he was on night shift when he attended a breakdown on the conveyor belt, which transports bread from the factory.
It was during this process that Tavarwisa argued he used three loaves of bread to test the conveyor.
It is these three loaves that brought about the charges of theft that he was convicted of and dismissed.

Aggrieved by the dismissal, Tavarwisa appealed to the Labour Court arguing that the alleged misconduct was never committed.
He submitted that the disciplinary committee failed to prove the alleged misconduct and the dismissal was not fair.
To substantiate its allegations of theft, Bakers Inn placed before the court a written report by Tavarwisa and one by a handwriting expert.

Tavarwisa’s purported report read: “Yes, I took the bread from the line, three loaves. I was hungry as the canteen was closed. I gave one to the guard. Thank you.”
However, Tavarwisa disputed authoring the report, arguing that it did not bear his signature.
This led to the company hiring a consultant forensic scientist Mr Leonard Nhari from Screenlab.

Mr Nhari reported: “I have found the design and construction of the handwriting on the questioned document to be similar and therefore consistent with standard hand writing of Jonathan Tavarwisa.”
Labour Court senior president, Ms Gladys Mhuri, said what the court was to determine with the evidence presented was whether Tavarwisa was properly found guilty of

stealing the bread on the day in question.
Ms Mhuri said: “What we have is a report that Tavarwisa totally denies authoring on the basis that it does not bear his signature.

“For comparison purposes, what was placed before the expert were four documents, the report in question and three others.
“The expert’s findings were that it was Tavarwisa who authored the report.”

She noted that the handwriting expert’s findings were not seriously challenged. The only challenge proffered by Tavarwisa was that the company code did not allow external interference, and that the comparison was done in his absence.

Ms Mhuri said it was proper for Bakers Inn to seek the services of a hand writing expert to find whether the report was written by Tavarwisa or not.
“Members of the disciplinary committee are not hand writing experts and it was beyond them to conclusively state that the report was written by Tavarwisa.

“The forensic scientist’s findings are very clear and put no doubt that it was Tavarwisa who wrote the report,” said Ms Mhuri.
She found that Tavarwisa was properly found guilty of the act of misconduct as charged and dismissed his appeal.