Communication Workers' Union v Hilton International Trinidad Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Judge: Beckles, C.
• Judgment Date: 26 March 1991
• Court: Industrial Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Docket Number: 174 of 1987
• Date: 26 March 1991

Industrial Court

Beckles, C.; Elcock, M.

174 of 1987

Communication Workers' Union

and

Hilton International Trinidad Ltd.

Appearances:

Mr. K. Logan Labour Relations Officer for party no. 1.

Mr. D. Patrick attorney-at-law for party no. 2.

Industrial law - Contract of service — Termination — Whether dismissal harsh and oppressive — Dismissal for gross absenteeism — Collective agreement — Provision for adverse entries on worker's file — Dismissal justified — Claim dismissed.

Beckles, C.

1 The instant matter came on for hearing on 23rd November, 1990. It concerns the complaint by the Communication Workers, Union (the Union) that the dismissal of Francis Baptiste (the Worker) from the employ of Hilton International Trinidad Limited (the Company) on 28th August, 1985 was harsh, wrongful, illegal, oppressive and not in accordance with proper industrial relations practices and procedures. The court after hearing evidence of the Union and submissions by counsel for the Company dismissed the complaint and indicated that it would give reasons for so doing later. We do so now.

2 In its written Evidence and Arguments filed in the court in this matter the Union had raised inter alia the question of the Company's alleged violation of Article 23 of the Collective Agreement governing the parties. The Article dealt with the manner in which adverse entries on a worker's personal file are to be handled; but in the main, the Union maintained that the offence for which the worker was dismissed to wit, for gross absenteeism was misconceived, could not be supported by the evidence, and was consequently unlawful.

3 The worker was the sole witness for the Union. He testified to being absent from work on the 3rd and 21st August, 1985 respectively when he was rostered to work from 6.00 p.m. on both occasions. He had called his supervisor at around 6.10 p.m. to explain his absence and on both occasions, he had later telephoned to inform the supervisor that he was unable to report for duty at all.

4 The reasons given on both occasions were virtually the same, namely that his motor vehicle had broken down. Under detailed cross examination the witness's story fell apart. He was forced to concede that what he had said but moments previously in answer to counsel was either untrue or equivocal. The witness's work record was then put to him and it revealed a tale of absenteeism, warnings, and suspensions which would have taxed the patience of the most tolerant of employers. A, statement of the worker's absences for the period March to September 1984 was put in evidence and marked “FB8”.

“1984 October 11

Mr. Francis Baptiste

Bars Department

Dear Mr. Baptiste,

We refer to a meeting held with you on October 1st, 1984 in the presence of your Shop Steward Its. Ashton Jemmotte, in the Personnel & Manager's office.

The meeting was called to discuss your gross and repeated absences from work, despite previous warnings and suspensions. Reference was made to your termination of services in 1983 for job abandonment which was subsequently reduced to suspension. You were also informed that numerous complaints were made to your Shop Steward Mr. Lawrence Julien with respect to your continued absenteeism. At that meeting you were told that you were not to continue working until a subsequent meeting was held to decide what action would be taken.

The meeting on October 10th, 1984 in the presence of your Shop Steward Mr. Ashton Jemmotte, your immediate Supervisor Mr. Paul Jones in the Personnel & Training Manager's office was again held as a means to inform you of the decision arrived at. It was decided that your services would be suspended for a period of one month without pay with effect from September 29th, 1984.

We have listed below your record of absences for the period March 1983 to September 1984:

March 1983	Sick Leave on the 7 & 8	- 2 days
Sick Leave	9 - 11	- 3 days
Sick Leave	14 - 15	- 2 days
March 29	Letter from Supervisor concerning sick leave taken
March 30 to June 03	Sick Leave	- 4 days
June 29 & 30	Sick Leave	- 2 days
August 24	letter concerning absences
September 09	Emergency Casual Leave	- 1 day
September 14-16	Sick Leave	- 3 days
September 14 1983	Termination letter
September 19 to 28	October Suspension period
September 19 to 23	Sick Leave	- 5 days
December 21	Emergency Casual Leave	- 1 day
January 30 to February 1,1984	Sick Leave	- 3 days
February 09	Ring Sick	- 1 day
February 20	Emergency Casual Leave	- 1 day
February 26	Casual Leave	- 1 day
March 02 to 03	Absent without permission	- 2 days
March 04	5z hours worked
March 05	Absent without permission	- 1 day
March 06	Off
March 07	Absent without permission	- 1 day
March 23-24	Sick leave	- 2 days
March 25 - 28	Sick leave	- 4 days
March 31-April 06	Sick Leave	- 7 days
April 16	Warning letter - Re continued absences
May 15	Ring sick	- 1 day
May 16-18	Sick Leave	- 3 days
May 23	Absent without permission	- 1 day
June 17	Ring Sick	- 1 day
June 24	Ring Sick	- 1 day
July 13	Ring Sick	- 1 day
July 23	Ring Sick	- 1 day
July 26	Ring Sick	- 1 day
August 2-4	Sick eave	- 3 days
August 7	Ring Sick	- 1 day
August 9	Casual Leave	- 1 day
August 13-17	Sick Leave	- 5 days
September 05	Casual Leave	- 1 day
September 14	Casual Leave	- 1 day
September 28	Ring Sick	- 1 day
September 21 - 27	Suspension	- 7 days

The above...