Unjustifiable dismissal

Sixty-four-year-old John Bailey* is drowning in debt.

The Industrial Dispute Tribunal (IDT) concluded in 2016 that Bailey, along with eight others, was “unjustifiably dismissed” by their employer, Private Power Operators Limited, in 2013.

The IDT also ordered the company to reinstate the workers within 21 days and pay them the equivalent of 52 weeks’ wages. Those who opted not to return were to be paid 130 weeks’ wages, minus redundancy payments already received.

The IDT is a quasi-judicial body established by law to arbitrate disputes between workers and their employers.

Nine years after the IDT ruling, Bailey has had to await the outcome of three unsuccessful legal challenges filed by the company before separate courts and that has taken a financial toll.

The redundancy payment he received over a decade ago was immediately paid over to his credit union because “me owe dem a bag a money”.

At the time, his two children were pursuing their tertiary education.

“It was never easy; it was rough. My kids dem went to university and a borrow me haffi borrow money because me no have a job. Imagine that,” Brown said during an interview with The Gleaner this week.

John Brown*, 66, another one of the dismissed workers, said over the years, his entire life-savings has been “exhausted” and his pension plan “diluted”.

At the time he was made redundant in 2013, his pension had not yet reached maturity, “so me end up no have none”, he claimed.

“Right now, me a 66 years old, so, basically, my working time is over. So this affects me more than, maybe, some of the other people,” Brown said, while crediting his wife and family for their support.

Two weeks ago, both men got a glimmer of hope when Jamaica’s final appellate court, the United Kingdom-based Judiciary Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), dismissed the last legal challenge available to Private Power Operators Limited.

In the February 11 judgment, the JCPC also ruled that it was not appropriate to remit the case to the IDT.

The company had also lost its legal challenges before the Constitutional Court and the Court of Appeal, both based in Jamaica.

The JCPC said the IDT was “fully entitled” to conclude that the dismissal of the workers was unjustified on the basis that the selection criteria had not been adequately discussed before the employees were selected.

Bailey and Brown recounted showing up for work at the private electricity-generating plant and were told by a security guard that they were not permitted to enter the premises.

“A inna the car park dem give we the letter. Dem no tell we nothing say we a get redundant. Dem just give we the letters and escort we through the gate,” Bailey claimed.

“Wa me know is that normally when you a get redundant, a HR (Human Resources Department) would a call you in a the office and tell you,” added Brown.

The IDT, in its 2016 decision, acknowledged that Private Power Operators Limited had established that a genuine redundancy situation existed.

However, it said the company fell down in the management of the consultation process related to the redundancies.

NOTHING CONCLUSIVE

Bailey and Brown insisted that their preference is to return to their jobs but claimed that there has been nothing conclusive in the two weeks since the JCPC delivered his ruling.

“Me want back my work, and if you can’t give me back my work, compensate fi all the money weh me lose by sitting down an waiting on you going through court to court,” Bailey complained.

Gavin Goffe, from the law firm Myers, Fletcher & Gordon, which represented the company, said he has already had discussions with the union that represents the former workers, who have agreed to formally communicate with him in writing.

“I assumed that the unions would be keeping their members updated,” Goffe told The Gleaner yesterday.

John Levy, general secretary of the Union of Clerical Administrative and Supervisory Employees – one of the unions representing the ex-workers – confirmed Goffe’s assertion.

Levy disclosed that his union would be writing to Private Power Operators Limited through Goffe to find out when payments would be made to the workers and the calculations that would be used.

“Because as far as we are concerned, based on the time that has elapsed, there needs to be some adjustments to the calculation,” he explained, before urging the former workers to be “a little more patient”.

Levy said it was unlikely that any of the former workers would be reinstated, noting that the private electricity-generating plant where they were employed is now being operated by a different entity.

*Names changed.

livern.barrett@gleanerjm.com