Posted
NeuchâtelDismissed for non-compliance with Covid rules, his appeal is unsuccessful
This Neuchâtel doctor went to work when he had to be isolated. Dismissed with immediate effect, he appealed to the Neuchâtel Cantonal Court. Who dismissed him.
The change in directives would have misled the doctor.
20min/Sebastien Anex
The man, employed in a public hospital in the canton of Neuchâtel, did not follow the Covid directives concerning hospital staff. He took it badly: he was fired with immediate effect, according to ArcInfo.
A six-month saga
It all starts in April 2020. The doctor underwent a first Covid-19 test and informed his superiors. In the absence of symptoms, he was allowed to work the same day, pending the result. It had turned out negative.
A few months later, in October 2020, the doctor must discuss his professional future with his superiors during an interview due to sick leave which occurred between April and October.
Just before this appointment, he presented several symptoms of the coronavirus. The practitioner then underwent a test, during which he was asked to isolate himself at home while awaiting the results.
Immediate dismissal
He chose to attend his appointment at the hospital anyway, without informing his superiors that he had just been tested.
The Covid test this time later turned out to be positive. He immediately informed his superiors of his contamination.
Information that earned him a dismissal with immediate effect. According to his hierarchy, the doctor “knowingly endangered the health security of the establishment” by going to a department where there were cancer patients.
Dismissed by the Court
The ousted doctor objected to the move, claiming that due to his sick leave he was unaware of new guidelines prohibiting staff awaiting a Covid test result from coming to work. He had behaved in October as in April. Moreover, he had acted “in good faith”, by transmitting the result of the test to his superiors from the outset.
An argument brushed aside by the Neuchâtel Cantonal Court, which considers that the doctor was required to be aware of the changes in Covid measures. Moreover, he did not respect his isolation as he had been asked. A behavior that the court deemed “irresponsible”.
(jem)