PHILIPSBURG--Simpson Bay Resort and Marina (SBRM, former Pelican Resort) is appealing Friday's ruling by the Court of First Instance that barred the resort from implementing two verdicts of the Court of Appeals ? one on November 4 and the other on November 7 - that were considered to have contained legal errors.
The appeal, filed on Friday, puts in limbo the more than 100 workers who had been sent home verbally several weeks ago, as they have to await the ruling in this latest appeal.
Workers Institute for Organised Labour (WIFOL) attorney Maarten le Poole told The Daily Herald on Monday that the workers were currently at home awaiting the verdict.
However, WIFOL President Theophilus Thompson said in a separate interview yesterday that the workers are ready and willing to resume work at any time,
Le Poole said the resort's attorney Jairo Bloem was requesting that the Appeals Court overturn Friday's judgement. Because of the urgency of the matter, Bloem also has filed for an interim measure to have Friday's verdict suspended for the duration of the appeal. That request is expected to be heard today, Tuesday, and a decision is expected later this week. The matter will be heard via video conferencing.
"If the request is granted, SBRM is for the time being allowed to proceed as if it has no connection with the WIFOL workers," explained Le Poole. "But if the request is denied, then SBRM will either have to comply with Friday's verdict after all, or keep paying fines for noncompliance."
WIFOL is of the opinion that fines have been accumulating since last Saturday. Le Poole explained that the fine had been set at US $25,000 per day. "So, a lot depends on tomorrow," he said.
Thompson said the workers had shown up for work following Friday's ruling, but had been unable to meet with Simpson Bay Resort Management Company (SBRMC) General Manager Jules James, who had been in Parliament at the time.
James, a United People's (UP) party Member of Parliament, came in for much criticism about his roles as the resort's general manager and an MP who had voted on two motions that involved the workers, despite saying in at least two interviews with this newspaper late last year and earlier this year that he would not do so.
Thompson said he had visited Parliament House on Friday to meet with James, but the MP "couldn't give me an answer."
Ruling
Judge van Veen stated in Friday's ruling that the Appeal Court ruling contained a mistake based on which the resort had sent WIFOL members home and had tried to induce them to accept less favourable labour conditions. Therefore, the judge said, the rights of WIFOL and its members needed to prevail over the resort's rights.
SBRMC and Royal Resort (RR) Management Ltd. had stated that the Appeals Court ruling did not contain any mistakes and it had been lawfully and unquestionably established that SBRMC was no longer deemed to be unified with the former Pelican Resort Club Management Company NV (PRCMC) and as such was not responsible for the workers' labour arrangements and conditions as agreed with PRCMC.
The auction of Pelican Resort Club, the following conflict about the labour conditions of the almost 200 employees and the temporary closure of the resort caused much commotion among workers and in society at large. The Appeals Court rulings of November 4 and 7 had not taken this commotion away, but had only aggravated it, the judge stated in his ruling.
According to the judge, WIFOL had "weighty interests" in maintaining the situation that had been in existence prior to November 4. Counterbalancing WIFOL's interest in connection with the collective labour agreements (CLAs) was SBRMC's and RR's interest to make the resort financially healthy, but this interest weighed less heavily than WIFOL's interest, the judge stated.
In the ruling that WIFOL contested, the three judges of the Court of Appeals had declared null and void the February 8 ruling in which the Court of First Instance had ordered Simpson Bay Resort to continue paying salaries to 182 workers the resort had been attempting to dismiss.
The company also was ordered to adhere to regulations stipulated in the CLAs closed with WIFOL for line personnel and supervisors of Pelican Resort Club and the resort's middle management and administrative personnel.
The Appeals Court overturned this ruling, which meant SBRMC no longer would be obligated to pay salaries to the 182 employees.
Even though the Appeals Court judges admitted they had been incorrect in stating that WIFOL's lawyers had not submitted legal documents within the required timeframe, they said this did not lead to a different judgement, because in the appeal WIFOL would have referred to its position in the Court of First Instance.
WIFOL's lawyers had stated that this was incorrect, because they had been prevented from filing new documents due to the issue with the correct timeframe.
Based on what was considered the "flawed" Appeals Court ruling, workers would have been forced into considerably less favourable labour conditions with their new employer.
Australasia Restaurants Dubai Pakistan cricket betting scandal Andy Flower Gender
No comments:
Post a Comment