Download PDF
CONCORDE HOTELS LIMITED (FREVIOUSLYLISTED AS IMO CONCORDE HOTEL LTD.) AND NATIONAL UNION OF HOTELAND PERSONAL SERVICES WORKERS (NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT) H ON. JUSTICE (CHIEF) P.A. ATILADE PRESIDENT B.N. OLOWU, ESQ MEMBER B. N. OBUA, ESQ MEMBER SUIT NO: NIC/13/90 DATE OF JUDGMENT WEDNESDAY, 19TH JUNE, 1991. LABOUR LAW Collective agreement - Need to be duly executed to be valid - Non-execution of- Effect of. LABOUR LAW Hours of work - How fixed - Section 12(1), Labour Decree No.21 of 1974 - Period not covered by - How treated. LABOUR LAW Salaries - Arrears of- Claim for payment off. When court will refuse - Whether c grant blanket approval of payment of. LABOUR LAW Strike - Illegal strike action by workers Period thereof- Whether workers entitled payment of salaries. LABOUR LAW Trade union - Service charge in the hotel industry - Proceeds of - Utilization Principles governing - Need for ne and consultation therefor. LABOUR LAW Trade union - Service charge in the industry - Proceeds of - Utilization Principles governing - Need for ne and consultation therefor. ISSUES 1. Is the Memorandum and Collective Agreement between the Appellant and Imo Concorde Hotel Branch of the Respondent a vital and binding agreement voluntarily entered into by all the parties concerned? 2. What determines the utilization of the service charge proceeds in the hotel industry? 3. Whether there was wrongful implementation of the superannuation scheme contrary to section 13-subsection 11(b) of the workers’ conditions of service. 4. Whether the Respondent proved its entitlement to arrears of overtime for the year1985. 5. Whether the striking workers were entitled to June and July salaries for the year 1988, which covered the period of the strike action. 6. Whether there was imposition of 48 hours week against the existing 40 hours week. FACTS: The Respondent union declared a trade dispute against the Appellant company, and the dispute was referred to the Industrial Arbitration Panel. The Panel in its award on the issues in dispute found against the Appellants on some of the issues in dispute, namely: payment of workers accumulated service charge, salary harmonization/elongation, and implementation of superannuation scheme. The Appellant was dissatisfied with the finding by the Industrial Arbitration Panel in its award, and appealed to the National Industrial Court. HELD (Allowing the appeal): 1. On Need for Collective Agreement between parties to be duly executed and effect of non-execution thereof The signatures of representatives of both parties, the management and the union, constitute sufficient evidence that the terms of a collective agreement were freely entered into or negotiated by both parties. Conditions of service as a body of provisions acceptable to both sides of the company must be signed by both parties to be valid. Ideally each of the parties to the agreement should have a signed copy. A collective agreement (conditions of service) that is not authenticated by the parties lacks legal validity. All claims based on it therefore automatically fail. In this case, it was not established that the Collective Agreement between the parties was duly executed [ of Metal Construction (WA) Ltd v. The Metal Products Workers Union of Nigeria (1984-1985)NICLR l27referredto]. 2. On Principles governing utilization of service charge proceeds in the hotel industry- It is a pragmatic, as opposed to an idealistic approach that is adopted in determining the utilization of the service charge proceeds in the hotel industry. It is not a matter of law. There is no law specifying what percentage of the service charge proceeds should be earmarked for particular expenditures, and these details are usually worked out through negotiation and consultation in each hotel, hence the variety of practice in different hotels. Thus, while it may be legitimate for the employer to set certain expenses against the service charge such an arrangement should be in consultation and agreement with the union concerned. In this case, since the validity of the Collective Agreement was not established, there was no agreement by the parties on the item. [Stadium Hotel v. National Union of Hotels & Persona1 Service Workers (1978-1979) NICLR 92 referred to]. 3. On How hours of work fixed in an undertaking - By virtue of section 12(1) of the Labour Decree No.21 of 1974 the normal hours of work in any undertaking can be fixed by mutual agreement or by collective bargaining, etc. Any hours of work in excess of the normal hours fixed under the above subsection shall constitute overtime. 4. On Whether workers entitled to salaries during period of illegal strike action - The fact that striking workers did not exhaust all constitutional provisions before embarking on an industrial action nullifies whatever claim they have to salaries during the period of the strike action. 5 On When court would refuse a claim for payment of arrears - The court would not make an award in respect of a claim for payment of arrears where no justification is presented to the court in respect of the claim, and the amount involved is not stated. The court would not give a blanket approval of payment.