Vanija Ha Karmika Sevaka Sangamaya v. Unilever Ceylon Limited – sllr 1995 volume 1 page 014

In the case between Vanija Ha Karmikā Sevaka Sangamaya (Union, representing the workman) and Unilever Ceylon Limited, the court addressed whether the termination of the workman’s services under clause 31(c) of the Collective Agreement (dated 30.5.85) was justified due to repeated unauthorised absences. It was held that the dismissal was valid, as the employer’s decision to suspend immediate termination in 1986 constituted a conditional deferral rather than a waiver of disciplinary action. Upon further unauthorised absence in 1987, the previously deferred punishment became effective under the agreed terms. The principle reaffirmed is that probationary reprieve does not erase prior defaults, and subsequent infractions can activate deferred sanctions. The court relied upon the construction of