1.This is an appeal against the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employ.
2. The appellant was employed by the respondent company as its Deputy General Manager. He
was answerable to the General Manager. The pertinent portion of the contract of employment
(P 40) between him and the respondent with respect to his duties provides as follows;
“1. Duties and Responsibilities.
Reporting to the General Manager you will be responsible for the general supervision and management services, plant operation and maintenance. Substantive responsibilities will encompass the following:
(i) – xvii
xviii Any other duties and responsibilities that may be allocated to... More
The appeal was referred to me for determination on the record in terms of Section 89 (2)(a)(i) of the Labour Act [Cap 28 : 01]. The appeal was filed in 2014 but has been lying idle due to a failure on Appellant’s part to settle sheriff’s costs for services of Notice of Set-Down. Through a directive issued on 3rd October, 2016 the Senior Judge directed the referral of all such matters for determination on the record. I proceed to determine the matter. More
This is an appeal against the respondent’s appeals committee (“AC”) decision. The AC confirmed the appellant’s conviction of a charge of deliberate refusal to carry out a lawful instruction given by a person in authority. This was a violation of section 3.5.1 of the respondent’s Code of Conduct. More
The facts giving rise to the case are that the employees after leaving the respondent’s employment approached an arbitrator arguing that they were owed money by respondent. They say that the money was what they should have been paid because they were doing the duties of a shopkeeper and therefore entitled to the salary for that grade.
The arbitrator ruled that they had only managed to demonstrate that they were working as general hands. To that end they are not owed what they claimed except for a few days leave which the employer agreed to pay them. An order was... More
