Blows for CPO, ministry

INDUSTRIAL Court president Deborah Thomas-Felix is reminding employers that it is neither fair, just nor in the interest of workers and the community, to paraphrase the words of a statute to deprive a worker of protection of the law.

Her comments were made in a ruling in which she and Industrial Court member Kyril Jack ordered the Chief Personnel Officer (CPO) to pay a clerical officer of the Ministry of Education all outstanding maternity leave benefits due for the year 2010. The CPO was also ordered to pay damages to Ria Ramkissoon in the sum of $8,000 before August 14.

Ramkissoon was on contract with the ministry as a school clerical officer. At the end of her first contract in 2007, she entered into a second contract with the CPO, who under the Industrial Relations Act, is deemed the employer of any Government worker. During her second three-year contract, Ramkissoon became pregnant and was expected to deliver in August 2010.

She applied for 93 days maternity and vacation leave but was advised by the ministry that her contract was ending on September 16, 2010 and, instead of applying for 93 days leave, she should apply for 35 days leave, which will take her to the end of the contract.

At the hearing of a trade dispute, the CPO and ministry argued that the worker’s contract of employment was a “fixed term contract” with a start date and end date and all entitlements and benefits, including maternity, came to an end when the contract ended.

However, the Industrial Court ruled that the labelling of Ramkissoon’s contract as “fixed term” by the CPO was a disguise to hide the true employment relationship between parties and to deprive the worker of her rights and entitlement under the law. Ramkissoon was represented by the Oilfield Workers Trade Union.

Thomas-Felix, who wrote the judgment, said the court also found that the worker had been employed continuously on successive contracts for an indeterminate period and that the employment relationship was not “fixed term” as labelled by the CPO and the ministry.

She held that the worker was entitled to receive the 13 weeks maternity leave benefits afforded to her under the Act in 2010, and that she was deprived by the CPO of her rights to receive all her benefits when she was only given leave for the period August 13, 2010-September 16,2010.

“We also rule that the decision by the CPO to deprive the worker of her rights to receive all of her maternity leave benefits is harsh, oppressive and contrary to the principles and practices of good industrial relations.

“Further, it is the ruling of this court that CPO’s decision to disguise the true nature of the legal employment relationship between the parties and thereby deprive the worker of her legal rights and benefits, is not in accord with the principles of equity and good conscience.

“The court deems this decision of the CPO to be unjust, unfair and egregious and that it warrants an order for the payment of damages,” Thomas-Felix said. According to the Industrial Court president, equity in the workplace is not a theoretical construct.

“It means something. It means, in essence, that each worker has the right to receive fair treatment and to have equal access to opportunities and benefits in the workplace.

“Equity and good conscience, in accordance to the IRA, demand that this worker receives the same treatment as pregnant women who are permanently employed at the ministry and indeed across the public sector in Trinidad and Tobago.

“We find that it is contrary the principles of equity and good conscience to disaggregate the maternity leave due to the worker, and to pay to her a portion of that leave, especially at a period when she was vulnerable. We condemn this decision of the CPO in the strongest terms,” Thomas-Felix said.