Report comment

Richard. If its Capability then how can it be relevant unless the claim is that procedurally that the Employer didn't allow latitude for re-training or drying out etc. (the relevance being that the Employee didn't inform the Employer).

Could it be Conduct? Maybe but only if lies were not something an average employee would tell or if the lies were pertinent to the mutual trust relationship (i.e. the Employee is handling money?). Even then an Employer would be on a sticky wicket unless the lies was directly relevant to the harm done to the Employer.

Scruff.