Originally Posted by
Juan Tugoh
There is no requirement to justify an SOSR dismissal, the test in law is that the dismissal is based on a genuinely held belief by the company that it had a substantial reason that was not "whimsical or capricious." Whether the unions like it or not the company does not need to prove that their reasons are substantial, that is not the appropriate test in law. There is case evidence to support this and the legal precedents have already been set.
I understand the reasoning behind belief and proof. However, the term substantial still remains. What would constitute the substantial reason to change the terms? That would still be explored, but as you say, would not need to be proved.