JULIANA FYNN AND GOLDEN TULIP HOTEL [2010]DLCHRAJ6009

Date	2010-12-20
Suit No.	Our ref: CHRAJ/206/2006/04
Citation No.	[2010]DLCHRAJ6009

ANNA BOSSMAN

[2010]DLCHRAJ6009
																																						<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">JULIANA FYNN<o:p></o:p>(COMPLAINANT)<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">GOLDEN TULIP HOTEL<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>(CHRAJ)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">Our ref: CHRAJ/206/2006/04&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;20-12-2010<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>On 17th May 2006, the
Commission received a complaint from the Complainant who alleged that while
performing her duties as a room attendant, she was accused of stealing an
amount of Two Hundred and Forty Dollars ($240) from a guest she attended to. A
search was conducted into her locker in which she usually kept her working gear
and clothes, but the said amount was not found. Thereafter, she was asked to
undress. The Complainant further alleges that an officer of the Respondent
inserted her unclean hands and artificial fingernails into her vagina in search
of the missing money. She said that the experience resulted in aberrations in
her vagina. The doctor's report after examining her revealed that she had
contracted 'pelvic pain chronically and vagina tissue'.<o:p></o:p>The Complainant added that
since the incident, an expatriate worker with the Respondent continually
subjected her to inhuman treatment by forcing her to dip her bare hands into
the water closet to clean it. She also said that the security chief officer
assisted her in her predicament, but thereafter started making sexual advances
at her. These matters forced her to resign from the Respondent on 4th August
2004. The Respondent was, however, yet to settle her with her terminal
benefits.<o:p></o:p>The Complainant added that she referred the matter to the National
Labour Commission in 2004, but it decided the case against her when it had not
even received the Respondent's comments.<o:p></o:p>RESPONDENT'S
CASE<o:p></o:p>The Respondent denied the allegations levelled against it. It
explained that on 30th July 2004, the Complainant did enter the guest's room
immediately before the reported loss although she had no reason to be in the
room. In the course of investigations, she denied entering the room, but admitted
it when she was confronted with electronic evidence, although she denied taking
the money.<o:p></o:p>The Respondent added that after searching her trolley and locker,
a female guard searched the Complainant's body, but she never touched her
private parts. It added that the Complainant made up that story 4 months after
the search took place when she visited Adom FM and a private local newspaper.
It said that not once in her complaint to the Local Union representative at the
Respondent institution or to anyone did she disclose a search into her private
parts except that she had been falsely accused of theft. It was only after 6
months that she visited a doctor claiming that she has pains in her vagina
arising from the alleged incident of 30th July 2004. The Respondent claimed
that the Complainant had, in the past, been investigated or searched for loss
of items in rooms she entered and thereafter items were reported missing. It
was the Respondent's case that contrary to the Complainant's allegations, its
junior staff did not live in fear, a verification it sought from its Local
Union. The Respondent concluded that the allegations levelled against the
security officer and the Complainant's supervisor were all false.<o:p></o:p>ANALYSIS OF
CASE<o:p></o:p>The Complainant intimated to the Commission in October 2007 that
she met the Lawyer of the Respondent outside the Commission and they agreed to
settle the matter and report details of the settlement to the Commission. The
Commission had to contact the Complainant and request an update on her case.
She claimed she was on admission at the Cocoa Clinic for treatment of the pains
she was still experiencing in her vagina. She later explained that her uncle
and the Lawyer of the Respondent agreed on settling her with an amount of
Ninety-Five Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢95,000) as compensation. She added that
she was now confused because she had still not received the money and both her
uncle and lawyer were avoiding her. The General Manager of the Respondent was
also unaware that any compensation package had been paid the Complainant.<o:p></o:p>The Commission subsequently,
realised that the Complainant was reluctant to pursue her case further. Among
other excuses, she asked the Commission to hold on to its investigations
because her doctor had given her a lawyer to pursue her case on her behalf.
Subsequently, she forwarded a letter of withdrawal of her case from the
Commission.<o:p></o:p>