The GCB Bank has been ordered by the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to pay three months' worth of net compensation at the current rates for each of the grades that each of the 76 former bank employees held prior to the termination of their employment.
The judgement of CHRAJ, dated June 20, this year, and signed by the Commissioner of CHRAJ, Joseph Whittal, requires the GCB to make the dismissed employees whole within three months of the ruling.
The GCB Bank, which took over the activities of the two banks on August 14, 2017, under a Purchase and Assumption Agreement (PAA), is responsible for the complainants, former employees of the defunct UT Bank and Capital Bank.
Language Arts and Math
The workers were fired by the GCB because their examination certificates did not show passing grades in English and mathematics.
In its conclusions of fact, CHRAJ noted, among other things, that the complainants were not informed beforehand that their appointments would be terminated if they failed to get credit passes in English and Mathematics.
It further stipulated that the affected employees who enrolled in higher institutions as mature students should be given consideration for reinstatement because they did not need to receive passing grades in English and Mathematics after passing the entrance test.
The commission said that previous employees who retook the English and Mathematics exams and passed should submit their results to the GCB Bank.
The former employees Eleanor Tettey and 36 other people and Sandra Dede Kumi and 38 other people each filed a separate lawsuit, and both cases were subject to the CHRAJ's ruling.
The workers should have received compensation for how they were handled, according to CHRAJ.
It was concluded that "they should be compensated for the traumatic experience of losing their jobs when they had a legitimate expectation of being in the respondent's employ after passing all checks and receiving appointment letters and confirmation letters after they had worked for the required period of probation."
Case
Seth Abloso, a labour consultant, filed a case on behalf of Ms. Eleanor Tettey and 36 other people on May 29, 2019, after the GCB Bank terminated their appointments.
The complainants claimed that the bank had terminated their employment unfairly and without cause.
A determination that the probation and issuing of fresh appointment letters, the decrease in salary, and the termination of their appointments were illegal and in violation of their collective bargaining agreement were among the reliefs demanded.
Therefore, they petitioned CHRAJ to order the GCB Bank to compensate all the impacted former employees.
On April 23, 2021, Kumi and 38 other people filed a second petition with the GCB Bank, requesting the same remedy as the first.
Eleanor Tettey and 36 others v. the GCB Bank judgments were applied to the latter case by CHRAJ, who opted to halt its investigation.
According to the principles of natural justice, it served the complaint on the respondent, the GCB Bank, for its remarks.
Investigations
The GCB Bank's answers, Tettey's statement and affidavit on behalf of the other 37 parties, as well as 14 additional papers were all evaluated by CHRAJ beginning with its investigations.
The commission convened 19 hearings after the evaluation of the documents in line with rules Six and Seven of the CHRAJ (Investigations Procedure) Regulations 2010 (C.I. 67).
In order to understand the prerequisites for admission to various tertiary institutions, it also conducted an interview with a representative of the National Accreditation Board.
From all of it, CHRAJ identified seven questions that needed to be resolved before making a conclusion.