Court rules Pizza Boys right to demote manager

THE INDUSTRIAL Court has dismissed the notion conceived by a fast food outlet employee that she was constructively dismissed by her employer. Reshema Maharaj, who lost her job as operations manager at Pizza/Burger Boys Ltd, regarded herself as constructively dismissed when she was demoted and her wages reduced. Through her representative, the Union of Commercial and Industrial Workers (UCIW), Maharaj sought to be reinstated at her former position without a loss of pay. The UCIW referred the dispute to the Industrial Court for arbitration. Sometime in 2001, Maharaj was promoted to operations manager of the company’s Maraval branch. She was then required to serve a period of probation.

According to the company, after evaluating her performance very closely during her probationary period, it was found that she did not live up to expectations. At the court hearing, it was found that Maharaj displayed severe lapses in memory of the occurrences at the workplace during her management of the Maraval branch of Pizza/Burger Boys. She did not remember that two managers resigned at the same time during her probationary period. She also disagreed that their resignation was as a result of her preparation of the shift roster in which she very rarely listed herself for duty during the night shift.

In its judgment, the court said: “We are satisfied that the obligations imposed on the company to take reasonable steps to appraise the worker’s performance during the probationary period by providing guidance through advice and warnings as necessary, were carried out.” It continued: “On the whole of the evidence, we have come to the conclusion that the treatment of the worker as operations manager during the probationary period, and the steps taken by the company when she was removed from that position, neither constituted a fundamental breach of contract nor was it contrary to the principles of good industrial relations practice to justify the worker treating the employment as at an end.”

The court found it regrettable that Maharaj presented herself as a most unreliable witness. “Her inability to remember events in her own career in the company, pleading that such happenings took place ‘a long time ago,’ did not help her. It was obvious to us that she adopted an evasive attitude which was designed to cover blemishes in her work history with the company.” The court agreed that Maharaj was not constructively dismissed and rejected the union’s case. The court comprised members Sandra Ramparass, Fitzroy Regis and Sam Maharaj.