EX-WORKERS TUSSLE WITH GPHA OVER SALARIES , BONUS AND BENEFITS

By Felix Engsalige Nyaaba

Former staff workers of the Ghana Ports and Harbour Authority (GPHA) have dragged the Authority to an Accra High Court for breaching a Collective Bargaining Agreement, and over salaries, bonuses, benefits and entitlements.

 They want the court to calculated their salaries and benefits entitled to them from the date of the beach of the Collective Bargaining Agreement in 2001 on the 155 working days of each plaintiff as enshrined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement and with interest

According to the ex- staff workers, numbering  1,286, they were employed by the authority as staff or permanent employees until sometime in September, 2001, when the re-organization led to their being laid off, without receiving any payment in lieu of notice, apart from some meager amounts described by the authority as “Voluntary Retirement/Deployment Package.”

They also said, the court action was informed as a result of the authority failure or refusal to comply with a ruling of the Labour Commission to pay them their full entitlements since 2002.

The application which  sought to compel the defendant to pay all the salaries, bonus and others benefits and entitlements has been filed on behalf of the applicants, George Arthur and 1,285 others by Regal Manna Chambers, an Accra based law firm.

The application has been fixed for April 17, this year for hearing.

In a statement of claim, the applicants said, sometime in the year 2001, the defendant due to change of policy underwent a structural transformation which saw the defendant company changed its operational status to become  owner of the ports and as that  had no option than to reduce its staff strength.

That, in order to down side its employment level, the defendant introduced what it called “Voluntary Retirement or Deployment Package,” and proceeded to implement it without recourse to an existing Collective Bargaining Agreement signed between the applicants and the defendant company which was  due to elapsed  on the 31^st December , 2002

According to the applicants, per the Collective Bargaining Agreement, if the applicants were to be laid off by the defendant, they were entitled to three months salary in lieu of notice, 1-4 years of services attracted two or four months’ salary for each year of services, bonus for the year 2002 and severance paid in accordance with the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement and the repealed Labour Act   (amendment) Decree 1969, (NLCD 3420.

In addition, the applicants  contended that the compensatory package upon the which the plaintiffs existed the defendant’s employment was arbitrary , and adverse to the interest of the applicants as they received less than they would have had , had the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement been implemented by the defendant.

It further contended that, the decision of the defendant to implement the Voluntary Retirement Package as against the Collective Bargaining Agreement was wrong in law, because the defendant was fully aware that the new compensatory package offered to the applicants was prejudicial to their interest and under the statutory obligation to apply the existing collective bargaining agreement which was more beneficial to the plaintiffs.

The applicants contended that, by substituting the collective bargaining agreement with eh voluntary retirement package, the defendant has unlawfully changed the terms of the employment contract it had entered into with the plaintiffs and that that termination of the agreed contract was null and void and of no legal effect.

For that the applicants are therefore praying the court among others for a declaration that , the plaintiffs were entitled to be retrenched based upon the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and not the Voluntary Retirement or Deployment Packaged been implemented by the defendant.

They are further claiming severally against the defendant for a declaration that the non-implementation of the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement in favour of the Company “Voluntary Retirement/Deployment Package” was illegal and therefore null and void.

In addition, they  wants an order directed at the defendant to calculate the difference due the plaintiffs as compensation for their retrenchment taking into consideration monies payable to plaintiffs under the collective bargaining agreement less money received under the Voluntary Retirement or Deployment package which monies shall be subject to verification by the a court appointed expert.

The applicants also want an order directed at the defendant to pay severance pay or award to plaintiffs together with interest thereon from the date of the termination of plaintiff’s employment by the defendant.

The plaintiffs further sought an order compelling the defendant to pay plaintiffs bonus due them for the year 202 in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement, damages for breach of contract with interest thereon from the date of the breach to final payment at the prevailing rate of interest and cost as well as any orders the court may deem fit to make.