BMC denies exit package agreement with ex-employees
Mpho Mokwape | Friday October 19, 2018 15:39
In a notice of appearance to defend filed on October 12, 2018, the Commission said it never entered into any agreed exit packages with the ex-employees as they alleged.
The Commission explained that at their request, all former employees, voluntarily left and were paid voluntary packages after consultation with the union and that they all accepted the packages.
“The Commission is not liable to the ex-employees for the relief claimed nor for any other relief sought,” BMC legal counsel Babuseng and Maswabi Attorneys wrote.
The move to defend arose from the former employees who filed a case before court after giving the Commission an undertaking around August to pay within the stipulated terms before proceeding to engage court on the matter.
The 40 ex-employees are demanding payment after they alleged the Commission breached a package agreement saying they have suffered huge financial losses.
The claimed breach of agreement came as a result of BMC embarking on a restructuring process in 2015 that resulted in some employees being retrenched. The Commission had embarked on a retrenchment process aimed at restructuring to improve its efficiency and services delivery and had engaged staff on the process.
Now the ex-employees, who have instructed attorney Uyapo Ndadi to institute court proceedings are demanding payment saying the Commission failed to stick to agreed terms.
The court proceedings follows a written letter dated July 27, 2018 with details that following talks between the BMC and the workers’ union, being the Botswana Meat Industry Workers Union, an agreed exit package was negotiated and agreed upon.
Those agreed terms, amongst others being payment of 26 working days for each year worked, which in essence is a monthly salary for each year worked and notice pay of five months’ salary.
The agreement was that the BMC will undertake leave pay to the employees, cancel training bond, allow housing loans to be settled as employees arranged with the bank, ordinary settlement before termination, company housing where applicable and lastly medical aid treatment/membership on a same terms of three months.
Despite these terms, the employees are crying foul, contending that all was discarded by the BMC, who then went with their own terms.
As a result, the employees are demanding payment on the disparities on grounds that despite agreed terms, BMC decided to use its own separate packages.
“Despite the agreed packages, the BMC decided to unilaterally pay using its own separate packages,” the letter reads.
The former employees note the BMC used 12 months’ wages as opposed to the agreed 26 days for each year worked, accrued gratuity, accrued leave and a two months’ notice as opposed to the agreed five months.
As a result the employees say the disparity in the packages resulted in them suffering huge financial losses as some worked for over 40 years.
“This therefore means that in a case of an employee who has worked 40 years, BMC withheld 28 months’ pay plus three months’ notice pay,” the statement read.
The former workers demand that they be paid their full retrenchment packages, which is less of what has already been paid to them within the seven days of the Commission receiving the letter. The case is before Justice Mercy Garekwe.