Portland Parish Council v Shackleford
| Jurisdiction | Jamaica |
| Judge | LeWars, C. |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1978 |
| Court | Industrial Dispute Tribunal (Jamaica) |
| Docket Number | Not yet available |
| Date | 01 January 1978 |
Industrial Disputes Tribunal
LeWars, C.
Not yet available
Labour law - Termination of employment — Retirement.
REFERENCE: The honourable Minister of Labour, by letter dated 16 th March, 1978, in accordance with subsection 3(a) of section 9 of the Labour Relations Industrial Disputes Act, 1975, referred to the tribunal for settlement a dispute between the employer and the individual.
The terms of reference to the tribunal were as follows:
“To determine and settle the dispute between the Portland Parish Council on the one hand and Mr. Isaac A. Shackleford, formerly superintendent on the other hand, over payments to be made to the estate with respect to accident insurance in accordance with paragraph 7 of the Retail Petrol Trade Industrial Relations Agreement between Jamaica Gasolene Retailers Association and the Dockers & Marine Workers Union and the National Workers Union dated August 25, 1975”.
The division of the tribunal selected in accordance with subsection (2) of section (3) of the Act was:
Mr. Russell LeWars — Chairman
Mr. Noel Holness — Employers' Representative
Mr. Headley Allman — Workers' Representative
The employer was represented by:
Mr. W.M Chin-See (legal) and Mr. C.A.R Bovell
Mr. E. Innerarity — Actg. secretary of the parish council
Mrs. E. Winnigan — Ministry of Local Government
Mr. Shackleford was represented by–
Mr. Thossy A. Kelly — Industrial Relations Consultant
Background and sittings
The dispute arose out of a direction by the Parish Council Services Commission to retire superintendent Isaac A. Shackleford from the Portland Fire Brigade at the age of 55 years instead of the normal retiring age of 60 years.
Effect was given to this direction by a letter dated 15 th September, 1977 over the signature of the Secretary of the Portland Parish Council wherein the said was directed to proceed on pre-retirement leave at the and of which he would be retired from the unified services of the parish council.
Mr. Shackleford contends that this action is irregular, unjustified and ultra vires while the parish council contends that it exercised its right under the Pensions(Paroch 1 Services) Act to retire Mr. Shackleford at that age.
Meetings were held at the (local level) with Parish Council Services Commission and at the Ministry of Labour, all of which...
To continue reading
Request your trial