[2024]DLCA17333 • February 15, 2024 • Court of Appeal
FRANCIS ONYINA AND 93 OTHERS vs. ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI LIMITED
The appellants, described as 2007 early retirees of AngloGold Ashanti, were among 400 employees earmarked for redundancy in 2007. Management represented that opting for early retirement would yield enhanced benefits compared to redundancy. The appellants accepted early retirement packages but later claimed these were lower than redundancy packages and also less than benefits paid to 2005 early retirees. They sought the difference between redundancy and early retirement packages.
read moreJUDGMENT DR. E. OWUSU-DAPAA, J.A. INTRODUCTION: My Lords: [1]. The appeal before us presents the pertinent legal question of whether an employer and worker can enter into termination agreement contrary to a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which was binding on the workers at the time that the mutual termination agreement was made. FACTUAL BACKGROUND- THE APPELLANTS’ CASE [2]. In a petition lodged with the National Labour Commission (NLC) on 12th March, 2008, the Appellants who described themselves as 2007 Early Retirees of AngloGold Ashanti were amongst the 400 employees who were earmarked for redundancy exercise by the company in 2007. Subsequently, representations were made to them by Management to the effect that those who would opt for early retirement instead of Redundancy would receive enhanced benefits otherwise than Redundancy package. Upon that representations they were placed under early Retirement instead of Redundancy package. [3]. The claim of Appellant.....