NATIONAL LABOUR COMMISSION vs. FWSC, GOV. AND HOSPITAL PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION [2013]DLHC12138

Date	2013-07-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. FAL 177/10
Citation No.	[2013]DLHC12138

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM

EFIBA AMIHEN FOR APPLICANT

AUGUSTINE AHAMEY FOR 1ST RESPONDENT

ERNEST OWUSU ABOAGYE FOR 2ND RESPONDENT

[2013]DLHC12138
																																						<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" >NATIONAL LABOUR COMMISSION<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>FWSC, GOV. AND HOSPITAL PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO. FAL 177/10&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: 5TH&nbsp;JULY 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL&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; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>The applicant has been brought under Section 172 of Act
651 by the National Labour Commission. Section 172 of Act 651 provides:<o:p></o:p>“Where any person fails or refuses to comply with a
direction or an order issued by the Commission under this Act the Commission
shall make an application to the high court of an order to compel that person
to comply with the direction or order”.<o:p></o:p>The background of this application is that, the NLC at
its sitting on Wednesday 20th February, 2013 heard a dispute before
it that has been brought by the 2nd respondent is GHOSPA AGAINST 1ST
respondent FWSC. The parties all presented their case and at the end of the
deliberation the Commission made the following directives.<o:p></o:p>1.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the FWSC shall restore
the convention difference of all members of GHOSPA with immediate effect.<o:p></o:p>2.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That FWSC shall refund the
convention difference that has been deducted from the salaries of GHOSPA
members not later than 31st March 2013.<o:p></o:p>The Commission further indicated in their directive dated
25th F February, 2013 as follows: “mean while, the Commission is
following up on early resolution of issues pertaining to the market premium
current before cabinet”.<o:p></o:p>It is because of the non-compliance of these directives
that the NLC has come to Court. At the hearing before the Commission the
following amongst other happened and I wish to quote an excerpt.<o:p></o:p>Commission:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; You all agree that they should not
be migrated until you have finished negotiation on their market premium, they
did not ask to be put back. Unilaterally, you migrated them; an act of bad fate
because what you agree must be binding on you so don’t say they asked. You left
them and did what you agreed. You would no therefore when the commission came
in as an arbiter it said “go and implement what you agreed on”. The question
then in how come the conversion difference is being deducted.<o:p></o:p>FWSC:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Because they have to be
reversed to the former place they were thus the reason why the machine deducted
it.<o:p></o:p>Commission:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; So you have agreed that there was a
problem with the present conversion.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; FWSC:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes<o:p></o:p>