National Union of Factory and Commercial Workers v Morris Hedstrom Ltd [2005] FJAT 43; Award 69 of 2005 (8 December 2005)

THE REPUBLIC OF THE FIJI ISLANDS

NO. 69 OF 2005

AWARD OF
THE ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL

IN THE DISPUTE BETWEEN

NATIONAL UNION OF FACTORY AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS

AND

MORRIS HEDSTROM LIMITED

NUFCW: Mr J Raman
Morris Hedstrom: Mr J Waqaivolavola

DECISION

This is a dispute between the National Union of Factory and Commercial Workers (the "Union") and Morris Hedstrom Limited (the "Employer") concerning the termination of employment of Gregory George Bencriscoster (the "Grievor").

A trade dispute was reported by the Union on 18 February 2005. The report was accepted on 10 March 2005 by the Chief Executive Officer who referred the Dispute to conciliation. As the Dispute was not settled the Minister authorized the Chief Executive Officer to refer the Dispute to an Arbitration Tribunal for settlement pursuant to section 6 (i) of the Trade Disputes Act Cap. 97.

The Dispute was referred to the Permanent Arbitration on 5 May 2005 with the following terms of reference:

"..... over the termination of employment of Mr Gregory George Bencriscoster with effect from 7 January 2005 on the grounds given by the management as unsatisfactory performance, which the union submits as unjustified, unreasonable and harsh. The union therefore seeks re-instatement to his present position without loss of salary and benefits from the date of termination".

The Dispute was listed for a preliminary hearing on 27 May 2005. On that date the parties were directed to file preliminary submissions within 21 days and the Dispute was listed for mention on 24 June 2005.

The Union filed its preliminary submissions on 17 June 2005.

On 24 June 2005 the Employer was directed to file and both parties to serve preliminary submissions within 14 days. The Dispute was listed for further mention on 29 July 2005.

The Employer filed its preliminary submissions on 25 July 2005.

On 29 July 2005 the Dispute was listed for hearing on 8 September 2005. Through no fault of the parties it became necessary for the Tribunal to vacate the allocated hearing date. The Dispute was listed for mention on 30 September 2005 and a hearing was subsequently fixed for 22 November 2005.

When the Dispute came on for hearing in Suva on 22 November 2005, the Union informed the Tribunal that the Grievor was not present for the hearing.

As a result the Union requested leave to withdraw the Dispute and that the Proceedings be discontinued. The Employer did not oppose the application.

AWARD

At the unopposed request of the Union the Dispute is marked withdrawn and the proceedings before this Tribunal are hereby discontinued.

DATED at Suva this 8 day of December 2005.

Mr. W. D. Calanchini
ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL