[2013]DLNLC6243 • August 20, 2013 • National Labor Commission
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN GEORGE AWUKU AND 10 OTHERS vs. NON-FORMAL DIVISION OF THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
The complainants stated that they were engaged by the Non-Formal Division of the Ministry of Education as Supervisors on 1 January 1994 in the Western Region of Ghana. Their appointments were terminated on 7 September 2004. They contended that the termination entitled them either to reinstatement or to dismissal benefits. The matter was referred to the National Labour Commission by the Ghana Integrity Initiative on 15 October 2009. The Commission found from the termination letters and the proceedings that the respondent had undertaken a restructuring exercise which resulted in the redundancy of the complainants, but instead of negotiating redundancy pay with them, it simply terminated their appointments. Portion of judgment: “Their case was that they were engaged by the NonFormal Division of the Ministry of Education as Supervisors on 01/01/1994… They stated that they were dismissed on 07/09/2004. The relief they were claiming was either reinstatement or dismissal benefit.” Also: “It was found out from the letter terminating their appointments and from the proceedings that the NonFormal Division did carry out a restructuring exercise which resulted in the redundancy of the Complainants.”
read moreTitle: IN THE MATTER BETWEEN GEORGE AWUKU AND 10 OTHERS vs. NON-FORMAL DIVISION OF THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION Date: 2013-08-20 Court: National Labor Commission(NLC) ___________ IN THE MATTER BETWEEN GEORGE AWUKU AND 10 OTHERSvs.NON-FORMAL DIVISION OF THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION[NLC]NLC/C-631/2009/013/37 DATE: 20TH AUGUST, 2013 FOR THE COMMISSIONPAUL OSEI-MENSAH MEMBER, NLC The Case of the complainant:Their case was that they were engaged by the Non-Formal Division of the Ministry of Education as Supervisors on 01/01/1994 in the Western Region of Ghana.The Ghana Integrity Initiative on October 15, 2009 referred the matter to the NLC for action. They stated that they were dismissed on 07/09/2004.The relief they were claiming was either re-instatement or dismissal benefit.The Case of the Respondent:The Respondents failed to respond to a reque...