Tribunal Orders PCPA to Pay Ex-Employee $23,250

Twenty-three thousand, two hundred and fifty dollars ($23,250) is the amount owed to a former employee of Penang Cane Producers Association (PCPA), Priya Lal.

Ms Lal won her tribunal case against the association, which was first heard on August 30, 2021, in Suva.

The ruling was made by Aleem Shah of the Suva Employment Relations Tribunal on May 20.

Ms Lal is represented by Damodaran Nair while CPCA is represented by Parmendra Sharma.

Ms Lal’s claim

Ms Lal had raised grievances that her employment as an officer of the Rarawai PCPA was terminated without any reason. She claimed she was unjustifiably and unfairly dismissed from work, hence seeking compensation.

She also claimed she was employed by PCPA sometime in February as an executive officer and was later promoted to accountant and secretary for three years.

It was heard that in April 2021, PCPA ceased her wages without notifications and on June 26 of the same year, she found out that her position was advertised in the Fiji Sun.

PCPA case

PCPA claimed that Ms Lal was not terminated.

In February 2021, the organisation claimed that an internal investigation had revealed mismanagement of funds.

As she was both the chief accountant and secretary at the time, they felt it appropriate to remove her from her position.

It was reported that she was removed from her position and offered a different one, which she declined.

The organisation claimed that Ms Lal has not returned to work since then.

Tribunal order

Given section 114 of the Employment Relations Act (ERA), the tribunal ruled that CPCA neither provided an honest justification for Ms Lal’s termination, nor was fair in its treatment of her, giving rise to her termination.

It was heard that there was indeed a breach of obligation as envisaged within the legislative framework ERA.

The tribunal found that CPCA had breached the implied term of Ms Lal’s contract of services.

It was heard that, according to Ms Lal’s submission, there was no discussion regarding the substance of the allegations made against her. After a suspension with half pay, they found that Ms Lal was not given her rights, that is, to be informed of the results of the investigation.

Given that she was not seeking reinstatement, the court has ordered that CPCA compensate her 18 months’ wages. Compensation is to be made within 21 days. Both parties are to bear their own costs.

Feedback: Beranadeta@fijisun.com.fj