High Court orders T&TEC to rehire dismissed worker

A High Court judge has ordered the immediate reinstatement of an estate constable at the Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission (T&TEC) who was dismissed after he was found guilty of allegedly tampering with a company vehicle.

Justice Joan Charles ruled in favour of Farad Mohammed and the Estate Police Association (EPA) against the Special Tribunal of the Industrial Court and T&TEC.

In her ruling on January 31, Charles ordered Mohammed’s case be sent back to the tribunal for proper reconsideration. She also ordered T&TEC to compensate Mohammed for his wrongful termination, with the amount to be determined by a Master.

Charles found that the tribunal’s decision, which upheld Mohammed’s dismissal at an internal disciplinary hearing, was unlawful and in breach of natural justice.

Mohammed was terminated in 2017 for allegedly tampering with a company vehicle’s emblem. His case was taken up by the EPA, which challenged the dismissal before the Special Tribunal, arguing that the disciplinary penalty was excessive. In 2019, the tribunal ruled against Mohammed, confirming his dismissal.

His attorneys argued their client was not allowed to make a plea in mitigation before T&TEC dismissed him and also that it did not abide by the commission’s code of industrial relations practices which set out the penalties for infractions, beginning with suspension for a first offence and dismissal for a second.

In her ruling, Charles found that T&TEC’s disciplinary code prescribed suspension with a warning for a first offense of tampering, yet Mohammed was dismissed outright.

“Once the tribunal determined that Mr. Mohammed had breached the code, it could only impose a penalty provided for by that code. It was palpably unfair to impose a sentence not provided for under the code, and even worse, one that was far more severe.”

She found the Special Tribunal wrongly treated T&TEC’s disciplinary code as a “guide” rather than a binding policy, despite T&TEC consistently applying it in previous cases. T&TEC and the Special Tribunal attempted to justify the dismissal by arguing that the disciplinary code was merely a ‘guide’ rather than a binding policy.

However, Charles rejected this reasoning, noting that T&TEC had consistently applied the code in past cases, making it part of the contractual relationship with employees.

She also found Mohammed was not allowed to present mitigating factors at the hearing of the one-man, such as his previous unblemished record and the minor value of the emblem.

“By failing to allow the First Claimant to advance mitigating factors, the Special Tribunal deprived itself of the opportunity to fairly dispose of the case by applying a sentence that was intra vires the code and appropriate for the offence.”

The charge against him stemmed from an incident on October 15, 2016, where he attempted to reattach a loose emblem on a company vehicle using glue. When his efforts were unsuccessful, he placed the emblem in his pocket with the intention of fixing it later. However, he forgot about it, and it remained in his uniform over a six-day leave period.

Upon returning to work, Mohammed voluntarily handed over the emblem to his supervisor and explained the situation. Despite this, he was charged with tampering with company property under T&TEC’s disciplinary code and subsequently dismissed.

Mohammed faced a six-session disciplinary hearing, where he was initially charged with both tampering and theft. The theft charge was dropped, but he was found guilty of tampering. T&TEC’s disciplinary code prescribed suspension with a warning for a first offense of tampering, but instead, Mohammed was dismissed outright.

The EPA challenged this decision, taking the matter to the Special Tribunal, a body that adjudicates labor disputes involving essential services. On October 23, 2019, the tribunal upheld Mohammed’s dismissal, prompting the EPA and Mohammed to seek judicial review before the High Court.

Mohammed and the EPA were represented by Michael Rooplal and Kevin Ratiram

Seenath Jairam SC, Sasha Sukhram, Shalini Singh,Michelle Benjamin and Tiffany Kissoon represented the Special Tribunal.

Kirk Bengochea and Nalini Sarah Jaggernauth represented T&TEC.