Metalum
Ltd has been dragged to the Kanifing Industrial Tribunal by a former employee,
Sarjo Sanyang, for unlawful dismissal.
The plaintiff, Sarjo Sanyang, claimed before Magistrate Colley the sum of D1,077 being unpaid eight days’ wages, the recovery of the sum of D44,100 being seven years social security contribution from 2007 to 2014, the recovery of the sum of D250,000 being damages and compensation for unlawful dismissal, at 36 per cent interest with costs.
The particulars of his claim stated that he was working for the defendant as an electrician.
The claim revealed that the employees had asked the defendant their employment contracts.
One Saturday morning, indicated the claim, the defendant convened a meeting with the employees and informed them that they wanted to sell the company, and did not want the buyer to work with the employees without employment contracts.
The claim further stated that, at the NIA, it was discovered that the employees should be given employment contracts, but their services would be terminated with two months’ salary paid, and a new contract prepared by the Labour Department.
According to the claim, the defendant asked the plaintiff to sign a termination letter and a new contract, following which the plaintiff requested to be given the document to go and seek advice before signing.
The defendant, revealed the claim, called the plaintiff and told him that the contract was ready and back dated and he should sign it; however, the plaintiff insisted that he would seek advice before signing it, and the defendant refused to give him the document.
The claim indicated that the plaintiff made an enquiry with the Social Security and discovered that the company was not paying his provident fund.
According to the claim, other employees and the plaintiff accepted to sign due to the advice of the Labour Department, and that the plaintiff wanted to sign, but the defendant refused and told the plaintiff that he should sign in the presence of the Labour Department official.
The claim further indicated that the defendant refused to pay the plaintiff his salary for the month of August, although the defendant was asked to pay the plaintiff by the Labour Commissioner.
The plaintiff stated in his claim that he was given a written hearing notice and the time indicated in it coincided with an appointment of the plaintiff’s representative, who wrote to the defendant to shift the time of the hearing from 11 a.m to 2 p.m but the defendant refused and dismissed the plaintiff.
Hearing continues.
Garba Cham, the secretary general of the Gambia Workers’ Union, represented the plaintiff.
