CAVMONT BANK DENIES ACTING UNFAIRLY AGAINST 41 EX-EMPLOYEES

GRACE CHAILE-LESOETSA writes
@SunZambian
CAVMONT bank Limited has dimissed allegations that it removed 41 former middle management employees from the payroll before paying them their full benefits.
John Mwansa Kalinde and 40 others sued the bank in the Lusaka High Court stating that the bank’s move was contrary to the current statutory law on payment of redundancy benefits.
Mr Kalinde and others want the Court to declare and order that the they have accrued the right to be paid the redundancy package under Clause N (I) of the applicable 2005 local management conditions of service which could not be unilaterally taken away from them.
They are seeking a declaration that the bank’s imposition upon them of a redundancy package of two month’s pay for each year served under the new employment code , amounts to a unilateral variation of Clause N.(I) of the applicable management conditions of service and therefore , null and void.
Mr Kalinde and others want the Court to declare that the bank was bound by the minister of labor ‘s directive under clause N.(i) of the applicable local management conditions of service of 2005.
The plaintiffs are seeking an order for the payment of a redundancy package of three months pay for each year served with merged allowances less what they were paid among other reliefs.
But in it’s defence , the bank admitted that the 41 were employed as middle management staff on diverse dates from 1992 to 2018.
It stated that the Plaintiffs had individual contracts which contained standard terms and conditions and the terms and conditions of employment were governed by a number of polices which included the Recruitment an Termination Policy effective of June ,2015 ( the Group Termination Policy) and the Employment Terms, Conditions and Benefits Policy approved on June 6,2017 ( the employment conditions policy ).
The bank stated that the Group Termination Policy made provision for the redundancy policy and the Employment Conditions Policy makes provision for the repatriation policy of the defendant.
The bank stated that the restructuring comprised of three components namely the rationalisng of branch network, centralization of branch back office functions and streamlining of the head office support function.
It will show that Group Termination Policy, does not make provision for the parties discussing and agreeing on the redundancy package failing to which the Minister of Labour and social security would determine the redundancy package payable.
Cavmount stated that it held a town hall meeting on July, 2019 with the Plaintiffs in which it explained the rationale guiding the consultation process and another meeting on June 27 2019 was held in which the Plaintiffs were further consulted and given an opportunity to present their concerns.
It stated that the process of declaring the unionzed employees redundant was , in addition to the law done in accordance with the collective agreement dated January 31, 2018 between ZUFIAW and itself.
The bank said that it did not refuse to obey any directive of the minister, but explained to the Minister, the fact that conditions of service did not provide for negotiation and that despite not being entitled to negotiate the redundancy package, it still considered the ex-workers proposal but was unable to meet the proposal due to its financial situation.
It said it paid the 41 ex-workers the redundancy package of two months basic pay for each year served in accordance with the law and not the 1 week pay under their conditions of service.
The bank stated hat the payment of the redundancy package did not unilaterally alter the Plaintiff’s redundancy package to their detriment .
Cavmount stated that at no point did it breach any of the clauses of the Plaintiff’s conditions of employment.