Eloise Shantel Curtis-Rolle v Doctors Hospital (Bahamas) Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Bahamas
• Judge: Harrison L. Lockhart
• Judgment Date: 20 June 2012
• Docket Number: No.1286 of 2009
• Court: Industrial Court (Bahamas)

In the matter of the Industrial Relations Act

And

In the matter of the Employment Act, 2001

Eloise Shantel Curtis-Rolle

Applicant

and

Doctors Hospital (Bahamas) Limited

Respondent

Before:

His Honour Harrison L. Lockhart, President.

No.1286 of 2009

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

NASSAU

Appearances:

Counsel for the Applicant — Obie Ferguson Jr. Esq.

Counsel for the Respondent — Mrs. Michaela Sumner-Budhi.

DECISION AND REASONS

Outline of Facts and Preliminary Considerations:

1 By Originating Application dated March 24, 2009, the Applicant alleges that she commenced employment with the Respondent in December of 2000, and that at all material times she was employed with the Respondent in the capacity of a charge nurse at a salary of $419.20 per week.

2 The Applicant alleges that on November 24, 2008, she was wrongfully dismissed by the Respondent; and she claims damages for wrongful dismissal against the Respondent.

3 The Respondent admits that the Applicant was employed by it in the said capacity and at the said salary but avers that the Applicant had acted in a manner repugnant to the fundamental interests of the Respondent and in contravention of its policies, viz., that:

“On October 11, 2008, whilst in the Respondent's employ the Applicant was requested to attend the recovery room to ascertain the status of a medical/surgical unit patient.

Whilst in the recovery room the Applicant became engaged in an acrimonious discussion with the recovery room nurse (Viola Beckford) regarding the course of action to be taken with respect to the patient. The discussion erupted into an argument which resulted in the patient removing himself (along with his intravenous drip) from the recovery room without the assistance of the Applicant. The patient travelled two floors in the elevator with no assistance from the Applicant (who was charged with attending to the patient).

The Applicant's actions were repugnant to the interests of the Respondent and amounted to gross misconduct and a fundamental breach of the Applicant's contract of employment. The Applicant was employed by the Respondent to provide nursing care to its patients. The Applicant's failure to put the welfare of the patient first jeopardized the patient's safety and exposed the Respondent to unnecessary risk.

The Applicant's actions were contrary to the values of respect, accountability, excellence and commitment that the Respondent has determined to uphold and as a result of the risk to the patient and the institution the Applicant was summarily dismissed.”

4 that during the currency of her employment with the Respondent she was always employed with the Public Hospitals Authority and has been employed with the Public Hospitals Authority since 2000.

5 She testified that she worked and continues to work a 40 hour work week with the Public Hospitals Authority, and that her working hours are 8:00am to 4:00pm.

6 The Applicant further testified that whilst her basic salary at the Respondent was $419.20, she often worked three consecutive twelve hour shifts with the Respondent and was paid $512.00 per week with respect thereto.

7 In the circumstances the Tribunal expressed the view that a matter for preliminary consideration was the question whether for all legal intents and purposes the Applicant could be deemed to have been an employee of the Respondent while simultaneously being employed with the Public Hospitals Authority on a full time basis.

8 To that end the Tribunal requested that counsel submit and exchange all relevant documents pertaining to the Applicant's employment with the Respondent and the Public Hospitals Authority.

9 Counsel was further asked to render submissions to the Tribunal on or before December 12, 2011 relative to the question whether the Applicant was lawfully considered an employee of the Respondent.

10 The Tribunal also directly solicited the assistance of the Public Hospitals Authority relative to any and all documents pertaining to the Applicant's contract of employment with that institution.

11 The Public Hospitals Authority advised that the Applicant commenced employment with it as a staff nurse on July 1, 2000.

12 It provided to the Tribunal the Applicant's job description as a staff Nurse which comprehensively sets out her nursing duties and noted that she is a shift worker.

13 Additionally the Authority provided the following relevant correspondence concerning the Applicant's employment:

“Office Note

Eloise Rolle, Staff Nurse

I telephoned Nurse Rolle this morning to inform her that it has been brought to my attention that she is presently working at Doctors Hospital. She did not deny the charge.

Nurse Rolle advised that she is required to work a minimum of two shifts which equates to one eight hour shift or two four hour shifts.

Reasons for working at Doctors Hospital:

• • able to take certification. courses offered by Doctors at no cost;

• • able to pay her school fees;

• • other senior officers in PHA are working at Doctors.

Nurse Rolle was advised that it is a conflict of interest and that the distraction is taking her away from her studies. The proof is that she dropped two classes spring 2006 because the load being too heavy.

M. E. Taylor

Manager, Training

27th June 2006”

“MINUTE

PHA/TEMP

Mrs. Hannah Gray

Acting Managing Director

Ufs. Director of Human Resources

Re

Re: Eloise Curtis Rolle

Please be advised that Eloise Curtis Rolle, staff nurse, was granted a Limited In-Service Training Award (salary only) for a one year period to enable her to pursue studies toward a Bachelor of Nursing degree at the College of The Bahamas (folio 4).

Please now see folio 12 which shows' that Nurse Rolle withdrew from two classes.

I requested an audience with Nurse Rolle on 27 June 2006 to review her progress in the program (folio 11). Nurse Rolle advised that she was experiencing personal problems at home. She also advised that she would need an extension to complete the Nursing programme, as she was advised by her supervisor to request only one year, knowing that the one year would have been insufficient.

On the 28 June 2006, I was advised that Nurse Rolle was working at Doctors Hospital. I called her and asked her whether she was indeed working privately at Doctors Hospital. She responded in the affirmative and grave the following reasons:

• • able to take certification courses offered by Doctors' at no cost;

• • able to pay her school fees;

• • other senior officers in PHA are working at Doctors.

It is my view that we should write to Nurse Rolle and ask her to desist with working at Doctors Hospital while she is on in-service training award and consider not granting the extension of the award when pursued.

The comments of the Nursing Advisor are attached for your information.

The above is hereby submitted for your information/comments please.

M. E. Taylor

Manager, Training

14Lh July 2006”

“ MINUTE PAPER

NO

NO:PHA/PF/304

Re

Re: Eloise Curtis Rolle

Following review of the Minute Paper concerning the above, I interacted with Mrs. Rolle at 10:00am and now wish to comment in two areas:

• A. Response to Mrs. Rolle

  • 1. I concur with the view stated that a letter should be written asking Mrs. Rolle to desist from working at Doctors Hospital, and in. addition working elsewhere.

  • 2. In view of the pending request for extension of the Partial In-Service Award, (approval) granting should depend on Mrs. Rolle's academic performance of this and the following semester.

  • 3. Mrs. Rolle be appraised of the impact on withdrawal from the courses, as this can be seen as affecting her status of good academic performance and warrant immediate termination of the award.

• B. Additional issues

  • 1. Impact on In-service Training Award Letter.

    There is no statement indicating that the awardee should not work.

    Recommendation: Add as g. You will not engage in employment while on In-Service Award unless prior approval has been granted by the Public Hospitals Authority, which will be based on academic performance to the date of request.

  • 2. Please be advised that it has been brought to the attention of the Nurse Advisor that Nurses on In-Service Awards, salary only, are experiencing difficulty with paying tuition and purchasing books, in addition to their family commitments. Semester tuition along with books can on average be $1,800.00 per semester.

Action: This situation will be investigated and discussed with the Nursing Advisory for PHA and Ministry of Health and other interested parties to arrive at amicable solutions or recommendations.

Williamae T. Stuart (Mrs.)

Nursing Advisor”

“ PHA/'TEMP.

25th July 2006

Eloise Curtis Rolle

Staff Nurse

Ufs. Hospital Administrator

Sandilands Rehabilitation Centre

Nassau Bahamas

Dear Nurse Curtis-Rolle,

Re

Re: Limited In-Service Training Award Employment At Doctors Hospital

Reference is made to our telephone conversation Curtis — Rolle/Taylor on 28 ^th June 2006 and the subsequent meeting between yourself and the Nursing Advisor on August 7, 2006, as they relate to the above subject.

I am directed to advise that because you have been granted a Limited In-Service Training Award (salary only) to enable you to pursue studies toward a Bachelor of Nursing Degree at the College of The Bahamas, for a one-year period, you are not permitted to work privately, unless you receive the expressed permission from the Managing Director.

It is noted that during spring 2006, you withdrew from two courses and obtained “C” grades in two courses. It is our opinion that your working at Doctors Hospital has adversely affected your performance of the College of The Bahamas.

In view of the above, you are being asked to desist from working privately, unless you obtain the expressed permission from the Managing Director.

Sincerely

M. E. Taylor

(for) Managing Director”

“18zh August, 2006

...