By: Kelvin Chiringa
An Indongo Toyota sales executive who was suspended on charges of dishonesty in 2020 has successfully won a labour case in which the company has now been ordered to pay him N$113 400 compensation.
Hilarius Iipinge was accused of disobeying his superior’s instruction in that he should not have ordered and installed a cruise control device for his demonstrator vehicle on the cost of Indongo Toyota.
However, Iipinge denied this, he saying he paid for the device and it was thus his.
He was again charged with misconduct and subjected to a disciplinary hearing on the 14th and 29th of May as well as 15th of June 2020.
Iipinge faced three accusations of dishonesty of which he was found guilty and consequently got dismissed after more than one disciplinary hearing.
Aggrieved, Iipinge then referred a dispute of unfair dismissal to the labour court on the 20th of July 2020.
At the back of the accusations against Iipinge were allegations from his management that he produced a suspicious invoice to prove that he had purchased the cruise control for his demo vehicle.
Speaking with The Villager, Iipinge said he had lost his initial invoice and had to get another copy from Indongo Toyota.
However, it bore a spelling mistake on his name, leading to accusations that he had produced a bogus document.
The labour commissioner ruled that in this instance, Iipinge was dishonest.
“The applicant did not buy the cruise control, but he represented an invoice which does not belong to him in order to mislead the respondent and that misrepresentation of fact is a dishonest act”, reads the judgement.
Further, Iipinge testified that he gave the cruise control, a nudge bar and roof ornament free of charge to a client who later bought a vehicle at Indongo through him free of charge.
His reasoning was that this would make his client, a certain Heita, to bring more business to him.
“The evidence before me proves that the cruise control, nudge bar and roof ornament were initiated by the applicant against the vehicle of a certain Heita. The applicant testified that these items were ordered for Mr. Heita as freebies which could not be fitted on the vehicle at the time when Mr. Heita collected it because they were not ready.
“There was no evidence placed before me to prove on a balance of probabilities that the applicant misrepresented or misled the respondent regarding the nudge bar and roof ornament,” ruled arbitrator Liwela Sasele.
The labour commissioner also ruled that Iipinge was not dishonest and thus Indongo Toyota did not have a valid and fair reason to dismiss him.
The court has also come to the conclusion that the chairperson of Indongo Toyota’s disciplinary committee was biased and conflicted in the handling of Iipinge’s disciplinary hearing.
Iipinge had also filed an application for the recusal of the chairperson who presided over the second disciplinary hearing.
“The respondent’s witness, Feris, testified that the chairpersons of the disciplinary hearings introduced themselves and institutions from where they came. Thus, the applicant knew where the chairperson came from. To this the applicant stated that at the time of the disciplinary hearing, he did know that Labour Dynamics CC was a retained labour consultant of the respondent. It is important to state that a mere relationship between parties is not good enough to prove perceived bias.
“But here the reference is to a retained labour consultant of the respondent, which advises the respondent on labour matters. Although the evidence of Feris, the respondent’s witness, was that if Labour Dynamics CC is involved in the matter, then the chairperson won’t come from Labour Dynamics, I doubt such testimony because the person who represented the respondent in the instant matter at arbitration proceedings is an official of Labour Dynamics CC, although he represented the respondent as an official of NEA, an employer’s organisation,” said Sasele.
The commissioner said the above was done knowing very well that the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing also came from the same labour consultancy.
As such, Iipinge’s claim of bias was upheld.
Indongo Toyota has thus been ordered to compensate Iipinge N$113 400 as well as to give him back his job.
Comments