This application for review was filed on 30 September 2013. The grounds for review are;
1. In hearing and determining the matter before her, the Honourable Arbitrator demonstrated that she was motivated by malice.
2. There was gross irregularity in the proceedings, more particularly in that the Arbitrator invoked the wrong Statutory Instrument.
3. There was violation of the rules of natural justice, more particularly the audi alteram parten. More
This is an appeal against Honourable Mr Z. Mtimtema’s arbitral award, handed down on 15th April 2014. The award upheld the dismissal of the Appellant from employment after the Respondent’s Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of misconduct. More
Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Security Guard. On 14th October, 2012 he went on to an address in Borrowdale where he was to perform his duties. He alleges that no one opened the gate for him and he decided to return home without notifying his superiors. He was charged and convicted of breaching Clause G of paragraph 4 of the National Employment Code of Conduct, SI 15/2006, habitual and substantial neglect of duty. Respondent had previously in 2010 left the premises he was guarding unattended without notifying his superiors. Respondent did not deny any of the incidences.... More
This is an appeal against the employer’s decision to dismiss the appellant from employment. The brief history of this matter is that the appellant was employed by the respondent as a Truck Driver Grade B4 of the Transport industry CBA S I 67/2012. He was invited to answer charges of proven theft offence section 5:1 of S I 67/2012. When the hearing was conducted he was convicted of gross negligent driving. More
This is an appeal against the discharge of the Appellant from the Civil Service following conviction for misconduct. The Appellant was employed at Belvedere Teachers’ College as a lecturer. More
The appeal is noted against the arbitral award dated 27/01/2012 directing Respondent to pay Appellant and 7 others one month salary as cash in lieu of notice.
The background facts to the matter are as follows;
The Appellant were employed by the Respondent on contracts from 18th of October, 2010. The terms and conditions of the contracts is the subject of dispute between the parties. The Appellants submit that they were on contracts without fixed duration and therefore the contracts could not be terminated on notice. In the alternative Appellants submit that even if they were on fixed term contracts... More
Appellant was employed by the respondent. It is alleged by appellant that he was initially employed on probation for a period of three months with an understanding from the respondent that he would be employed on a permanent basis on expiry of this period. This did not materialise and appellant signed two further fixed term contracts on the understanding that these periods would be taken into account when the employment contract was eventually finalised. Appellant alleges that he thereafter left employment in September 2011. The dispute was subsequently referred to arbitration. The Arbitrator found in favour of respondent. Appellant has... More
