James Andrews v Thompson Trading Company Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Bahamas
• Court: Industrial Court (Bahamas)
• Judge: Keith H. Thompson
• Judgment Date: 23 September 2011
• Docket Number: IT/NES/1303/09

Between:

James Andrews

Applicant

and

Thompson Trading Company Limited

Respondent

Before:

His Honour Keith H. Thompson, Vice President

IT/NES/1303/09

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

New Providence

Appearances:

Mr. James Andrews in person.

No appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent.

DECISION

1 This matter having been set down for hearing on the 3 ^rd and 4 ^th August, 2011 and the parties having been duly summoned proceeded on the 3 ^rd August, 2011 despite the fact that there was no appearance by the Respondent. The Tribunal proceeded pursuant to section 59 (1), (a) of the Industrial Relations Act Chapter 321 of the Statute Laws of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas (“The Act”). Section 59 (1) (a) reads as follows;

“Section 59 (1), In addition to the powers conferred on it under the foregoing provisions of this Act the Tribunal may —

(a). proceed to hear and determine any question arising in connection with a dispute in the absence of any party who has been duly summoned to appear before the Tribunal and has failed to do so.”

2 This Tribunal is more than satisfied that the Respondent was properly served with the notice of trial which was signed for by an agent of the Respondent at its Shirley Street premises. In fact on the 4 ^th August, 2011, Mr. Marcian Cash along with a witness for the Respondent appeared at the Tribunal for the continuation of the instant matter. This Tribunal will forever take all necessary steps to avoid any unnecessary back log of matters. This Tribunal also does not take lightly persons showing up when they feel like. The matter was heard in the absence of the Respondent and the following is the judgment of the Tribunal.

EVIDENCE OF MR. JAMES ANDREWS — (THE APPLICANT)

3 It is the evidence of Mr. Andrews, the Applicant that he commenced employment with the Respondent on September 17 ^th, 2007 and terminated on the 5 ^th November, 2008. At the time of termination his salary was $300.00 per week. The Applicant was also a member of the medical insurance plan of the Respondent. The Applicant was unable to produce any copies of pay slips due to the fact that they were destroyed by water and thereafter discarded.

4 The Applicant related to the court the sequence of events leading up to his termination. According to the Applicant, the Respondent has as a part of its system something called credit. The policy relating to credit is that if a delivery driver has to fill out two or more pages of the credit sheet, then they are to return the entire order back to the warehouse. Sometimes the credit comes about because the store doesn't check their supplies or inventory and they end up not needing what they ordered.

5 On the 4 ^th November, 2008, the Applicant took an order to City Market Food Store in the Harbour Bay Shopping Center. He was there all day checking off orders. When the Applicant got to Terrance Hall's order he started having some difficulties. In an effort to follow the procedure of the Respondent, the Applicant told City Market that he had to take the order back to the warehouse. In light of the fact that the Applicant was driving an open flat bed truck, he realized that he had to go back to the warehouse to get some plastic wrappings to re-wrap the pallets. He left to go and pick up the wrap, when he returned to City Market, the managers were pleading with him to let the order stay because the shelves were empty but the Applicant refused and told them that his supervisor said to bring the order back.

6 The Applicant proceeded to stack the goods on the pallet and told his helper to wrap the goods. It was at this point that Terrance Hall appeared at City Market Harbour Bay. When Terrance came in, the Applicant was at the side and his helper was at the pallet with the plastic wrap in his hand. Terrance then pleaded with the Applicant not to take the order back and said that he would check it off. The Applicant left City Market Harbour Bay and went back to the yard with about three (3) sheets of credit and some merchandise. It is the Applicant's further evidence that as he was checking the credits back into the warehouse his helper came to him and told him that a Mr. Fox wanted to see him. He went to see Mr. Fox and Mr. Fox asked him why he didn't bring the order back and why he took so long at City Market. The Applicant informed Mr. Fox that Terrance Hall came to the store and said that he would check the order off and he also said that he would explain everything to them at the office of the Respondent. That was the end of that day.

7 The following day the Applicant went to work but nothing was said to the Applicant. They let him work and at the end of his shift, Mr. Fox called him and told him that they had a meeting and decided that they were going to terminate him. He was told to return for his cheque on the Friday. (This was on a Wednesday) and to hand over all keys and I.D. The Applicant did this and then left. He did not go for the cheque on the Friday but went on the Monday and a Mr. Munroe gave him a cheque for $300.00 for owed vacation and wanted the Applicant to sign for it. The Applicant refused to sign and asked for the reason for his termination because the letter didn't say.

8 Mr. Munroe then left and never came back so the Applicant went to the Department of Labour. The Applicant had worked on the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and was also owed one (1)...