This is an application for condonation of the late filing of an appeal by the applicant employer against an arbitral award which was made in the respondent employee’s favour.
The background to the matter is that the respondent attended at arbitration on a matter where he claimed non payment of overtime worked. Conciliation efforts had failed to resolve the matter thus leading to the reference to arbitration. It was concluded that indeed respondent had to be paid overtime calculated using the documents which were tendered to the arbitrator on the quantum. More
This is an appeal against the decision of Honourable Arbitrator C Tanyanyiwa that was handed down on 22 October 2015. The award is couched as follows:
“I therefore award that the employee is entitled to the following:
(1) 90 days cash in lieu of annual leave due.
(2) Terminal benefits upon termination of the contract of employment.
(3) The employee is entitled to outstanding wage arrears during the time she was on maternity leave.
(4) The issue pertaining to non-payment of wages during the time she was on maternity leave is normally dismissed because she got paid a salary of... More
The applicant has approached this Court for stay of execution of the arbitral award issued on 25 June 2013. The applicant is deemed to have failed to pay the respondents their outstanding salaries and benefits upon closure of the company on 20 December 2011. More
This matter was set down as a rule 22 matter where the respondent had failed to file its response on the matter. As required by the rule in question the defaulting party can show cause why it defaulted and why it should be allowed to regularise its position so that the matter can then properly proceed as an opposed matter. More
The appeal is against a determination handed down by the National Employment Council (NEC) for the Plastic Manufacturing industry on the 7th of October 2013 which determination confirmed Appellant conviction on a charge of violating health and safety regulations for failure to wear protective clothing provided by the employer and the penalty of dismissal consequently imposed. The appeal is opposed.
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent. On the 1st of May 2013 the Appellant was discovered upon an inspection to be wearing the safety clothing not provided by the employer. He was wearing an old and phased out overall... More
