Ad agency ordered to pay worker $316,000 for ‘wrongful dismissal’

THE INDUSTRIAL Court has ordered an advertising company to pay one of its workers   $316,000 as damages for what the court deemed as ‘wrongful dismissal.’

The Court said the companys, Hernandez/FCB Limited must pay the worker, Deocharan Singh the money within 42 days of the judgment which was given  earlier this month. Singh was a $10,900 a month employee whose substantive position was that of Accounts Manager. The Banking, Insurance and General Workers’ Union (BIGWU) which watched Singh’s interest reported that Singh was dismissed in circumstances that were “harsh, oppressive and not in keeping with the principles and practices of good industrial relations”. In making out its case, the union claimed that the worker was accused by the company of using advertising rates of two companies, in order to obtain favourable rates for third parties.

According to BIGWU, the company also accused Singh of causing the invoices for work done for third parties to be billed to the said company’s clients. To these accusations Singh said he had the normal verbal authorisation and invited the company to verify this with the said clients. In its arguments, the union said that over the years, Singh  had developed a style of his own with the full knowledge and acceptance of  the company from which it had benefited tremendously. The worker denied all the allegations made against him by the company.   It came out in evidence that he had an unblemished work record throughout his  years of service, and had been commended by the Managing Director, Ric Hernandez for being an outstanding performer.

In its arguments, the company said among other things that the worker did not have the permission to do what he did, he endangered the company’s reputation, he ignored the company’s instruction, and was given numerous opportunities to reform his behaviour and practice, but it was to no avail. During testimony, Singh who was the union’s sole witness explained that the advertising industry was a very competitive one in which one operating in his capacity, must be able to develop innovative strategies for the survival and growth of the company. He explained that one of his traits was that he liked helping people, and because of this, he was able to make strategic contracts with key persons in the society and this in turn served to enhance the company’s business. After reviewing all the oral testimonies, the Court found that Singh did not breach the company’s policy by seeking and obtaining verbal approval for use of the client’s low rates or sponsorship of third party advertisements.

It noted too that the company’s Chief Executive testified that this was permissible in certain circumstances. The Court found that the company dismisssed the worker under harsh and oppressive conditions, and in a manner contrary to the principle of good industrial relations practice. The Court’s members were Herbert Soverall, Presiding Member, Albert Aberdeen and Sat Maharaj - members.