Ratulevu v Rajendra Prasad Foodtown Ltd [2011] FJET 15; ERT Grievance 50.2009 (27 September 2011)

IN THE EMPLOYMENT
TRIBUNAL AT SUVA
ERT Grievance No. 50 of 2009

BETWEEN:

MR. ASERI RATULEVU
WORKER

AND:

RAJENDRA PRASAD FOODTOWN LTD.
EMPLOYER

Appearance: Mr. S. Lesi for the Worker

FORMAL PROOF

1] This matter was set down for hearing on 11 March 2011 and due to the non appearance of the employer, Mr. Lesi appearing for the worker asked for a default judgment as the employer has failed to appear in 8 of the 12 mention dates set and in all the 3 hearing dates.

2] The Tribunal considered the application and since the employer had made a written submission and the worker had replied with an answering submission, ruled that this case be formally proved.

3] The worker Mr. Aseri Ratulevu took oath and gave the following evidence:

i] Now living in Waila, Nausori and had worked for the employer Rajendra Prasad Foodtown Ltd. from 1997 to 2009 when he was terminated.

ii] Mr. Ratulevu was employed as a day security and also acted as a sign writer for the company. As a day security his job was to stand beside the cashier observing customers who came in and went out.

iii] He worked 8 hours a day, for 7 days a week, from 7 am to 7 pm at the rate of $2.05 an hour and he did not at anytime sign any- employment contract with the employer.

iv] As to the reason of his termination, Mr. Ratulevu told the Tribunal that there was a robbery in the company and the employer alleged that I had fore knowledge of it and because of that the boss told me to go home. There was no termination letter and the employer did not prove the allegations made. I was not asked to explain.

v] Mr. Ratulevu further told the Tribunal that during his entire 14 years with the employer he was not warned or given any written or verbal warning whatsoever and that what the company did was totally wrong as he has a family to look after and is the sole breadwinner.

vi] Mr. Ratulevu asked for reinstatement without any loss of benefits and compensation for unfair termination.

vii] The Tribunal considers that reinstatement will not be an option due to the allegations of gross misconduct and the fact that he was summarily dismissed under section 33 of the Employment Relations Promulgation 2007.

viii] An allegation was made and there was nothing to show that he was found guilty for assisting one Mereoni Usa and there was no evidence to show that he was ever given warning for disobedience to lawful orders or an occasion cited where he disobeyed lawful orders.

ix] From the evidence, the Tribunal rules that the employer's action in terminating Mr. Ratulevu was wrongful, unjustified and unfair and in that regard makes the following Orders.

Orders

1] That Mr. Ratulevu to be reimbursed all lost wages from the date of termination which was 8 June 2009 to the date of hearing this matter which was 11 March 2011, a total of about 1 year and 8 months wages;

2] That Mr. Ratulevu be awarded a further 4 months' wages as compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to his feelings; and

3] That the total amount (Orders 1 + 2) be paid within 28 days of this decision.

DATED at Suva this 27th day of September 2011.

Sainivalati Kuruduadua
Chief Tribunal