MONICA DANSO AND ELECTRICITY CORP. OF GHANA [1997]DLCHRAJ5719

Date	1997-10-22
Suit No.	Our Ref: CHRAJ/118/95/2312
Citation No.	[1997]DLCHRAJ5719

BENJAMIN K. ÒPPONG

[1997]DLCHRAJ5719
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B050">MONICA DANSO<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;(PETITIONER)<o:p></o:p>AND<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B050">ELECTRICITY CORP. OF GHANA <o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">(CHRAJ)<o:p></o:p>

Our
Ref: CHRAJ/118/95/2312&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 22/10/1997<o:p></o:p>

</div>commissioner:<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#161600">BENJAMIN K. ÒPPONG DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LEGAL/OPERATIONS) FOR<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#111100">COMMISSIONER<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>Miss Monica Danso the 39 year old petitioner
is aggrieved by the sudden termination of her permanent appointment with the
Electricity Corporation of Ghana which was announced through the medium of a
letter dated 23rd March 1989 and read in part as follows:-<o:p></o:p>"In view of the restructuring taking
place in Electricity Corporation you have been identified as someone whose
services will no longer be required.<o:p></o:p>Your appointment is therefore being terminated
with effect from 1st April, 1989”.<o:p></o:p>In her petition dated 27th February 1995 the
petitioner bemoaned her fate as a redeployee because she has been such a hard
worker and never had a query concerning her work. She also stated that she has
had reliable information that her name was not on the original list of those to
be redeployed. Before the lodgement of her complaint before this Commission the
petitioner had complained to the Ministry of National Mobilisation and Social
Welfare. The record of proceeding submitted to this Commission shows that the
Ministry did an exhaustive investigation into the petitioners complaint and on
the 29th January 1992 wrote to the Managing Director of the respondent
Corporation as follows:-<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“There is no denying the fact that your
silence over the issue is to say the least causing embarrassment to the
Ministry and the other organisations which handled the matter, not to mention
the mental agony in which &nbsp;Miss Monica
Danso has been subjected tounduly. The Ministry is, as indicated earlier,
convinced that Miss Monica Danso has been &nbsp;a victim of discrimination considering the
overwhelming evidence given by Mr. Lartey of the Corporation's CDR and for that
reason there is the need to review her retrenchment in the interest of fairness."<o:p></o:p>The case for the respondents is that the
petitioner's appointment as at elephonist/ receptionist was terminated as a
result of the restructuring exercise which identified her as one of the
employees whose services were no longer required. According to the respondents
their records clearly showed that the petitioner was not a’ desirable
employee’&nbsp;&nbsp; Her work was looked on as
been unsatisfactory whilst her conduct left much to be 'appreciated'. The
respondents further accused her of absenteeism from work without written
permission and quarrelling at will. In support of these accusations the
respondents exhibited query letters allegedly issued against the petitioner in
the course of her employment. The respondents submitted that the redeployment
of the petitioner was carried out under Article 59 of the Collective Bargaining
Agreement.<o:p></o:p>The only issue which falls to be determined
is whether or not the services of the petitioner were properly dispensed with.<o:p></o:p>There is
no gainsaying the fact that the petitioner lost her job through a restructuring
exercise. The letter terminating her appointment recited thefollowing:-<o:p></o:p>"In view of the restructuring taking
place........<o:p></o:p>That
being the case, it should be expected that the procedure set down to dispense
with an employ</main>