Industrial Court rules against hardware worker who resigned

THE INDUSTRIAL COURT has ruled against a hardware worker who, through the Government Industrial and General Workers Union, filed a trade dispute in which she asked that the court to deem her resignation as “constructive dismissal” because of incidents with her former boss’s wife and daughter.

The union argued Liza Burnley was maligned and subjected to unsubstantiated and vexatious charges which were not properly investigated and which caused her mental distress leading to her tendering her resignation on February 22, 2016.

The union sought $277, 248 in loss of wages, $125,000 for manner of dismissal and loss of fringe benefits and other damages Burnley suffered as a result of her dismissal.

However, Industrial Court members Heather Seale, Indra Rampersad-Suite and Angella Hamel-Smith said it found no merit in the claim that Burnely was constructively dismissed from her position as senior warehouse supervisor at Yee Ken Hardware.

The judges said there was no evidence that her resignation was forced and although she claimed that the hardware’s owner Eusebius Yee Ken asked for her resignation so that she could receive her gratuity, her letter of resignation did not detail any grievance which led to her to leave the job.

Seales, who wrote the decision, also said it did not constitute constructive dismissal but as a voluntary resignation to receive gratuity.

She said there was also no evidence that Burnley’s resignation was submitted “in the heat of the moment” since it was tendered four days after the alleged incident with Yee Ken’s daughter. The alleged incident with Yee Ken's then wife took place in 2014 and there was evidence that he urged her to report it to the police.

The Industrial Court members also pointed out that Burnley received a total of $34,934 in gratuity and there was no convincing evidence by the union that the worker was entitled to gratuity on resignation.

Seales said based on the company’s evidence, certain sums were set aside if there was a need for retrenchment and a rough calculation of all the money paid to Burnley as advances and what was paid to her on her resignation, approximated to the severance payments provided for under the Retrenchment and Severance Benefits Act.

Seales said although Burnley was not retrenched, but resigned voluntarily, the employers acted reasonably in paying her gratuity and there was no basis for uplifting that payment.

Yee Ken Hardware was represented by attorney Saira Lakhan.