MRS. JANET DOE vs. SOCIAL SECURITY AND NATIONAL INSURANCE TRUST AND THE TRUST HOSPITAL

The appellant had worked for over 20 years at Trust Hospital as an employee of SSNIT. Following an organisational restructuring in which Trust Hospital was separated from SSNIT and incorporated as a separate legal entity, the appellant was declared redundant with effect from 31 December 2012. She contended that under section 65 of the Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651), SSNIT was obliged to negotiate a redundancy package with her but instead unilaterally paid her an exit package comprising three months’ salary in lieu of notice and salaries for the remaining 22 months to her retirement. She protested through her lawyers that the package was arbitrary and inadequate, particularly because it did not account for pension contributions, possible salary increases, provident fund contributions, fuel allowance, clothing allowance and other employment benefits. She also alleged discriminatory treatment because younger employees were allegedly given a more enhanced package. Notwithstanding her protest, she retained the money, completed the handing-over and disengagement formalities, and surrendered SSNIT property. She then entered into a three-month employment contract with the Trust Hospital commencing 2 January 2013, but that contract was terminated after SSNIT restored her original employment following her rejection of the redundancy package. The Court of Appeal’s account of these facts appears principally in the opening narrative of the judgment beginning: “The plaintiff/appellant in this suit was employed for over 20 years at the Trust Hospital...” and continuing through the description of her claims and the respondents’ defence.