IDT 29/2020
IDT 9/2010
The Company initiated redundancy and lay-off proceedings. The Union and Company subsequently agreed to postpone redundancy, but the Company disbursed redundancy payments and letters to the workers anyway. The company later reopened on a phased basis but did not re-employ union delegates and only
IDT 2/2023
IDT 15/2023
IDT 5/2009
Summary
The Authority reduced the benefits for a particular department of their organisation. The Association represented the workers in the department as the reduction was deemed unfair.
The Authority contended that they exercised their right to reduce these benefits per their
IDT 2/2022
IDT 16/2007
The company granted the aggrieved leave, after an individual requested vacation on his behalf. The company however soon learned that the aggrieved had been convicted of assault and sentenced to ten days of hard labor during his leave. He was then
IDT 20/2018
IDT 6/2017
IDT 39/2017
On July 10, 2017, the IDT requested briefs from both parties regarding the dispute. However, the company and the union submitted a joint letter to the tribunal, indicating that they had arrived at a settlement agreement.
The terms
IDT 32/2019
IDT 34/2016
The aggrieved, a Call Centre Supervisor, she was called to a meeting regarding her refusal to handle escalated calls. Following this meeting, her husband visited the company and allegedly issued threats to the aggrieved’s manager. The aggrieved also reported her manager
