On 29th March 2012 the Honourable Y Malama made an arbitration award. In terms thereof, she nullified the demotion of Respondent by Appellant. Appellant was aggrieved by the ruling. It then filed an appeal to this Court against the award. More
In this application, Applicant seeks an order for the payment of arrear salaries and allowances, terminal benefits, severance package, punitive damages and costs of suit. All this amounts to a total of US$132 574.00 as shown on the computations submitted to the Labour Officer who handled the conciliation. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the National Employment Council Appeals Committee “NEC Appeals Committee”.
The facts of the case are common cause. The respondent was employed as a cementer by the appellant.
On 8 October 2014 one Max an employee of appellant during his course of work intended to serve the workers’ committee representatives with certain documents. It was alleged that Max engaged the chairman of the worker’s committee, who invited the rest of the workers’ committee members and other employees. More
On 12 December 2014 the appellant dismissed the respondent from employment following disciplinary proceedings.
An Internal appeal was unsuccessful. He appealed to the National Employment Council Appeals Committee, ‘the Committee’. The Committee found that the respondent committed a less serious offence, and ordered that the penalty of dismissal be set aside and substituted by a final written warning. The appellant was therefore to reinstate the respondent and in the alternative pay damages. More
The Appellant was charged with a violation of Section 38 of the Colcom Code of Conduct – Theft. He was convicted on the charge and a sentence of dismissal from his employment was imposed. He appealed unsuccessfully to the two internal appeal structures. He has now brought the present appeal to the Labour Court.
The appeal was noted initially on the basis of six grounds. At the hearing of the matter the Appellant’s Representative conceded that the first three grounds being essentially grounds for review were incompetent grounds. More
