The Appellant noted an appeal against the determination by the National Employment Council for the Textile Industry Appeals Board dated 8 April 2013 which determination upheld the Appellant’s conviction on the charge of theft and the imposition of the dismissal penalty. More
The appellants were formerly employed by Fleximail until on or about August 2011 when they were transferred to Chloride Zimbabwe. Fleximail is a division of Art Corporation, as is Chloride Zimbabwe whose proper citation is Art Corporation Limited t/a Chloride Zimbabwe.
Appellants were moved from one division of the same company to another division. Noteworthy is that they moved from the paper industry to the battery industry. They were placed into grades as close as possible to those they had occupied in the paper industry. At the time of transfer, the appellants’ remuneration was above that in the battery industry. More
This is an appeal against the decision on an arbitrator.
The respondents are section managers at one of the appellant’s branches, the Kariba Branch. During the course of their employment the appellants raised complaints which were not resolved to their satisfaction by the appellant. The grievances were referred to a labour officer when conciliation failed the matter was subsequently referred to arbitration. More
At the hearing of this matter, counsel for respondent made an oral application for condonation of late filing of the notice of response and late service of the notice of response on the appellant. I dismissed the application and gave the following reasons;
1. Respondent was a self actor at the inception of this matter. He got legal representation in January 2016.
2. The notice of response was filed out of time. Counsel for respondent indicated that on realising that the notice of response had not been served on the appellant, they caused it to be served on 21 January... More
On 19 June 2015 at Harare, Arbitrator M Dangarembizi made an arbitration award. He dismissed appellants’ claims of underpayment by their employer, the respondent. Appellants then appealed to this court against the award. More
