Employment law

    Scenario AJemil, an employee with the company for 3 years, is suspected of coming to work while under the influence of illegal drugs because he always has bloodshot eyes in the mornings.You have discussed this with Francois, the HR deputy director. You and Francois agreed after discussion that Jemil will be dismissed. However Francois suggested that you should follow a disciplinary procedure before dismissing him. Francois’ opinion was that the best way forward was to bring Jemil into a disciplinary hearing without giving him notice so he does not have a chance to invent a story. At the hearing, Jemil asked if a colleague Sophie can join him or whether he could have a trade union representative with him in the hearing. Francois said he could not as the meeting had already started.In the hearing Francois told Jemil he was dismissed, but could have an appeal which would take place in the morning the next day.You presided over the appeal with Francois. Jemil arrived with 3 colleagues and a solicitor. He wanted the 3 colleagues to testify that he does not take drugs and has bloodshot eyes because he goes swimming before work and the chlorine makes his eyes go red. Francois told Jemil he was not entitled to have his colleagues attend but he had a legal right to a solicitor in the meeting.After the appeal hearing, Jemil’s dismissal was upheld and he was dismissed for gross misconduct. Please address the following issues in your reporta. From the facts, does Jemil have a substantive claim in unfair dismissal?b. Do any procedural issues arise from the disciplinary and appeal process that took place?