Download PDF
MANAGEMENT OF EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND NATIONAL UNION OF BANKS, INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EMPLOYEES (NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT) HON. JUSTICE (CHIEF) P.A. ATILADE - PRESIDENT S.O. KOKU, ESQ. - MEMBER ALHAJI Z.M. BELLO - PRESIDENT SUIT NO: NIC/9/86 DATE OF JUDGMENT - WEDNESDAY, 10TH JULY, 1986 LABOUR LAW - Dismissal - Need to give warning before dismissal- Rule of- Rationale for. LABOUR LAW - Dismissal - Summary dismissal - Where court holds to be unreasonable and unwarranted – Court not disposed to order reinstatement of dismissed workers - Effect on termination of appointments of dismissed workers - Whether such appointments terminated with notice. LABOUR LAW - Strike - Nature of - Whether constitutes breach of contract by employee - When could summary dismissal. TRADE DISPUTE - Strike - Nature of - Whether constitutes contract by employee - When could justify summary dismissal. ISSUE: Whether the dismissal of the entire staff of the Appellant based at its head o: unwarranted in the circumstances of the case. FACTS: On 10th March, 1986 some workers of the Appellant went on strike and picketed right from resumption time till about closing. The Appellant in its reaction dismissed all the worked concerned. As a result, a trade dispute was declared, which was eventually referred to the Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP). The terms of reference of the dispute to the court, as well as to the Industrial Arbitration Panel, are "unwarranted dismissal of the entire staff of the company based in the head office". The IAP in its award ordered that the workers, unless they were unwilling to go back, be reinstated to their jobs with effect from 10th March, 1986. The Appellant was dissatisfied and objected to the IAP award, and the appeal was referred m: :r.al Industrial Court. HELD: (Allowance the appeal in part and granting payment of accrued salaries and entitlements): 1. On Whether summary dismissal of the Appellants justified on ground of strike- Although a strike is a breach of contract by the employee, and is thus an act of such a iir.re that could justify summary dismissal. In the instant case, the Appellant's action in summarily dismissing the employees in the circumstances of the case was unreasonable and unwarranted. The Appellant ought to satisfy the court that it acted reasonably in summarily dismissing the employees. 2. On Need to give warning to employee before dismissal and rationale for - The rule of good industrial relations practice requires that warnings be given before dismissal. In the instant case, instead of dismissal letters, management ought to have issued a circular letter warning all the staff concerned that unless they resumed work immediately, their employment would be regarded as at an end. 3. When appointments of dismissed workers will be deemed to have been terminated without notice - Where the court holds that the action of an employer in summarily dismissing its employees is unreasonable and unwarranted, and the court is not disposed to order reinstatement of the dismissed workers, the appointments of the employees concerned would be deemed to have been terminated without notice, and would therefore order payment of terminal benefits to the employees concerned. H ON. JUSTICE (CHIEF) P.A. ATILADE PRESIDENT, S.O. KOKU,ESQ. MEMBER, ALHAJI Z.M. BELLO MEMBER