AVIANCE GHANA LIMITED vs. NATIONAL LABOUR COMMISSION [2017]DLHC3913

Date	2017-06-29
Suit No.	SUIT NO. HR/0130/2016
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC3913

JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO HIGH COURT JUDGE.

VICTOR ANKU-TSEDE ESQ. (WITH HIM PATIENCE ADUAKWA) FOR THE APPLICANT.

EFFIBA AMIHERE FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[2017]DLHC3913
																																						<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" >AVIANCE GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NATIONAL LABOUR
COMMISSION<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (HUMAN RIGHTS
DIVISION 1), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. HR/0130/2016&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; 29TH JUNE, 2017<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>VICTOR ANKU-TSEDE ESQ., (WITH HIM PATIENCE ADUAKWA) FOR THE
APPLICANT. <o:p></o:p>EFFIBA AMIHERE FOR THE RESPONDENT. <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE GIFTY
AGYEI ADDO, HIGH COURT JUDGE.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>On 25th November, 2016, the instant application for
judicial review was filed. Per the supporting affidavit, the Applicant stated
that it has two sets of union within its fold namely; the Senior Staff Union
and the Junior Staff Union represented by the General Transport, Petroleum and
Chemical Workers’ Union (GTPCWU) of the Trades Union Congress (TUC). <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>According to the Applicant, it has as its policy a condition in
its Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) where as part of its Retirement
Service Benefits, on attaining the age of sixty (60) years, an employee was
entitled to two months and one month basic salary for each completed year of
service from the date of employment for Senior Staff and Junior Staff unions
respectively. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This condition of Retirement Service Benefit was to end effective
31st December, 2015, and therefore the Applicant proposed to give to
the Senior Staff and Junior Staff unions each a total of their two months and
one month basic salary for each year worked from the date of employment
respectively to the intended cut-off date. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>According to the Applicant, the Senior Staff union negotiated with
management and signed a new agreement which had their monies put in interest
yielding fund. The Junior Staff union on the other hand requested that what was
to be put in their fund was 1.5 months back salary for each year worked instead
of one month up to 21st July, 2013 (the date of delivery of the
award by the Respondent) and then 1.5 months per year up to 31st December,
2015. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This aspect of the Junior Staff request provoked disagreement with
the Applicant’s management, whereupon the matter came before the Respondent for
arbitration. As part of the several conditions which formed the arbitration
award published on 22nd July, 2013, per Exhibit ‘AVGL 2’, the
Respondent stated simply thus: ‘(a) Retirement Benefit: 1.50 months pay for
each year of service’. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 21st May, 2015, Exhibit ‘AVGL 3’ was written to the
Respondent by the union informing it that the Applicant’s management and the
union conflict as regard the true interpretation of what clearly is the award
in relation to the ‘Retirement Benefit of 1.50 months pay for each year of
service’. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 31st October, 2016, the Respondent rendered what it
described as a ruling on the subject matter aforementioned. Per Exhibit ‘AVGL
7A’ – this is what the Respondent stated inter alia: The award granted the
Union a retirement benefit of one and half (1</main>