Supreme Court orders reinstatement of 300 Air Zimbabwe workers

Zimbabwe’s national carrier, Air Zimbabwe, has been dealt a major blow after the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe threw out its application to have a Labour Court decision to pay or reinstate retrenched workers reversed, Nhau can reveal.
The appeal was against confirmatory proceedings conducted by the Labour Court on September 8, 2017, in terms of section 93 (5) of the Labour Act.
The national carrier terminated employment contracts of its workers on three months’ notice and issued the termination letters on July 31, 2015, which led the aggrieved workers to respond collectively thus lodging a complaint of unfair dismissal.
They cited that their employment had been terminated contrary to the provisions of section 12(4) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01].
Presiding judge Justice Paddington Garwe sitting with Justices Susan Mavangira and Nicholas Mathonsi ruled that the termination of the worker’s employment was wrongful and unlawful, thus upholding the Labour Court’s decision.
“The finding in the draft ruling that the termination of employment was null and void meant that the termination of employment was wrongful and unlawful. The law is settled in this jurisdiction that the remedy for an unlawful termination is reinstatement, alternatively payment of damages.
“In my view, there was no substitution of the order of the labour officer but rather a correction and addition to make the order acceptable in terms of the law. At the end of the day, therefore, the order granted by the court a quo was one within the contemplation of the labour officer, the amendment having been made merely to ensure that the confirmed order accorded with the dictates of the law.”
Garwe stated that the changes effected by the Labour Court were indeed amendments and that they cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be termed a substitution.
“…labour officers are often lay persons with little or no experience in matters legal. For that reason they are given the power to make draft rulings which are then subjected to scrutiny by the Labour Court, a specialised court in matters of labour and employment.
“For the above reasons, I find that there is no merit in this appeal. The amendments effected by the court a quo in the process of confirming the draft ruling were completely consistent with section 93 (5) of the Act which allows confirmation ‘with or without amendments’.
“The appeal be and is hereby dismissed,” said Justice Garwe.
In its appeal , Air Zimbabwe had argued that the court a quo was wrong in substituting the ruling of the labour officer with its own determination and that in doing so, the court went beyond merely amending the ruling.
It argued that the court had no statutory authority to substitute the relief granted by a labour officer with what it considered appropriate.
The arguments arose from the fact that in her draft ruling, the labour officer (who is the first Respondent in this matter) found that the respondents had been unfairly dismissed and that the termination was therefore null and void, arguing that Air Zimbabwe must comply with section 12(C)(2) of the Labour Act before filing an application with the Labour court for the confirmation of that ruling.
Contacted for comment chairperson of the Air Transport Workers Union Alexander Guchu said they were still lodged in a caucus meeting following the judgment.
“My friend, please give me some time because this is a hot issue and I can only comment further after the caucus meeting we are currently attending over the issue.” Nhau/Indaba