IDT 56/2016
IDT 21/2022
The Aggrieved was contracted to work with the company for two years, but was terminated due to inconsistent/poor performance.
The Aggrieved contended that though he was on a probationary period, the reasons for termination must be established, and the Company unfairly terminated him.
IDT 10/2008
Summary
The aggrieved was employed by the company as a Mechanical Maintenance Man Grade 2 after completing a four-year apprenticeship with them. Three months later, the company made her redundant after conducting a manpower review and concluding that her department was overstaffed.
IDT 27/2022
IDT 17/2021
IDT 1/2019
IDT 52/2016
The Union members, formerly the Engineering Department personnel, were placed on administrative leave with their employment later terminated for an industrial action which saw the Company suffering $30 Million in losses.
The Company contended that the matter was
IDT 17/2008
The matter, which surrounded the aggrieved’s termination by the company was initially referred to the Tribunal by the Ministry of Labour, afterwhich, both parties submitted briefs and requested to commence local level discussions. On October 23, 2009, the parties then submitted
IDT 37/2018
IDT 22/2021
IDT 20/2021
IDT 21/2021
