The Industrial Court has fined two local waste disposal companies a total of $40,000 after they were found in contempt of a court order to continue paying seven workers who had been presented with dismissal letters after they were prevented from working, owing to their refusal to get vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus.
Describing the judgment as “excellent” yesterday, Communication Workers Union (CWU) secretary-general Clyde Elder confirmed that Envirotech Holdings Ltd and Waste Disposals (2003) Limited were each fined $20,000 and were also ordered to continue paying the salaries of the seven until the substantial matter is resolved.
Envirotech Holdings Ltd is the parent company and has been ordered to pay the fine on/or before April 29.
The situation arose in November 2021, when the company informed workers of the requirement to get the COVID-19 vaccine in order to continue their employment.
Elder provided contextual details as he explained, “Seven of the workers were not vaccinated and reported for work and they were debarred from coming onto the compound because they were not vaccinated.”
Acting on behalf of the aggrieved workers, the CWU filed an application at the Industrial Court, along with application for an injunction to stop the company from moving ahead with the plan to prevent the workers from performing their duties.
Elder said the injunction, which was granted in December 2021, instructed the company not to interfere with the workers’ jobs and to also keep them on the payroll until the matter was determined.
Saying the workers were not paid in December as the company moved to have the injunction discharged, Elder said because this was a violation of the court order, the union later filed an application for contempt of court in January. He said when the application came up for hearing on January 20, the company, “agreed that they will abide by the order of the court and they agreed that they would now pay the workers for December and January…and they would pay them by January 27, and they would continue to pay them until the matter is finished so there was a consent order that was entered into by the company and the union under the auspices of the court.”
Confirming the workers were paid at the end of January, Elder claimed, “They later refused to pay them for February and going forward.”
Further to this, a letter dated March 16 was presented to the seven workers indicating their contracts had become frustrated as a result of being unable to perform their duties, hence the working relationship could not move forward and their services would be terminated.
However, the CWU returned to court on March 8 after the company failed to pay the workers and filed a contempt of court application which was heard on March 23. Meanwhile, the company also filed an application to have the December injunction discharged.
During a hearing on Wednesday when both applications were addressed, the court reminded the company that the consent order in January superseded the injunction from December.
Regarding the contempt of court application filed by the CWU, Elder said the company failed to file a written defence in this matter and verbal explanations were not enough to justify the non-payment of the workers.
The next hearing is scheduled for September 30 but the court said it will be seeking to move it up.
In the interim though, Elder said the seven workers have continued to report to work daily as is outlined in their contracts.
Pressed to comment on the ruling, especially in light of the earlier mandate by Government for all public servants to get vaccinated, Elder said, “I had to remind the company in court that there is no government mandate on vaccination.”
He said the issue of safe zones was mentioned but neither company is a safe zone.
“The company admitted that they themselves do not have a vaccine mandate.”
Questioning what basis was used to send the workers home in the absence of such a mandate, Elder said, “It is an excellent, legal victory for industrial relations in that you cannot simply alter people’s terms and conditions to their detriment because you feel this is what it should be…even if it is a pandemic.”