2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Ghana Court of Appeal, per Suurbaareh, J.A., dismissed an employers appeal from a National Labour Commission ruling that the termination of employee Margaret Jacqueline Adjimah was unfair. The union (Respondent) had complained that the employer (Appellant) terminated Adjimahs employment without following Article 8 of a binding Collective Agreement, which sets out progressive disciplinary steps and a hearing before dismissal. The employer contended that under the contract and Labour Act sections 1518 it could terminate by notice or pay in lieu and need not give reasons. The Court held that section 19 of Act 651 renders those common-law termination provisions inapplicable where a collective agreement contains more beneficial express terms; accordingly, Article 8s fair procedure and reasons requirements govern. Applying the shifting burden principles in the Evidence Act, the court found the union had shown noncompliance with Article 8 and the employer failed to disprove unfairness. The appeal was dismissed and the Commissions order, including one-year salary compensation, was affirmed.
SUURBAAREH, J.A.:
This is an appeal against the decision of the National Labour Commission, dated 26th February, 2020, in which it ruled that the termination of the appointment of a member of the Petitioner/Respondent union, Margaret Jackeline Adjimah, by the Respondent/Appellant, on 4th May, 2018, was unfair as same was done without recourse to due process. The decision was arrived at after the Labour Commission, had heard the parties and examined all the processes, filed before it. The parties will from henceforth be referred to as Appellant and Respondent, with the Labour Commission being referred to simply as the Commission.
The Appellant, dissatisfied with the decision and orders made against it by the Commission, filed an appeal against same on the sole ground that the decision is against the weight of the evidence, as it did not file any additional issues upon receipt of the copy of the decision, as indicated in the Notice of Appeal at page 112 of the record of appeal.
Based on a complaint by the affected worker to the Respondent, it wrote a letter dated 7th May, 2018 to the Appellant requesting details of what happened leading to the termination of the employment of the worker and the processes that were carried out before the said termination. To this letter, the Appellant, wrote a letter of even date, confirming the termination of the employment of the worker and also stated that it was done in accordance with the law. These letters can be found at pages 3 and 4 respectively of the record of appeal.
Upon receipt of the response from the Appellant, the Respondent, in a letter dated 8th May, 2018, and appearing at page 2 of the record of appeal, wrote to the Appellant pointing out that the procedure laid down in Article 8 of the Collective Agreement was not respected in taking the decision to terminate the appointment of the worker and further pointed out that per sections 19 and 105 of the Labour Act 2003 (Act 651) it was clear that where there are express terms in a Collective Agreement which were more beneficial, they take precedence over the terms of the contract. It then called for reinstatement of the affected worker immediately. When the Respondent failed to get a favourable response from the Appellant it lodged a complaint of unfair termination of employment with the commission, leading to a hearing and the decision resulting in this appeal.
The Commission upon a complaint from the Respondent, wrote on 18th June, 2018 to the Appellant,