Standard Chartered Bank has withdrawn termination letters given to staff members who were due to be laid off.
The latest move follows a court ruling by an Accra High Court presided over by Justice Kwaku Arkaah – Boafo that the bank’s CEO as well as its Head of Human Resource Rosie Ebe-Arthur, were in contempt of a motion of an interlocutory injunction which asked them to put on hold the layoffs.
The bank has directed the affected staff to report to its Opeabia House on Monday May 23, 2016 for further directions.
Lawyer for the affected workers, Prince Fredrick Nii Ashie Neequaye who confirmed the development said.
“The bank has written letters to withdraw the letter dated 29th February, 2016 for which they were held in contempt of. I have received a copy and all the letters that were meant for my clients; that is the 10 plaintiffs, have been delivered.”
The interlocutory injunction filed by the plaintiffs was seeking to restrain the bank from going ahead on the 29th of January, 2016, to implement an MOU it signed with the Union of Industry Commerce and Finance (UNICOF) who negotiated on behalf of the workers over redundancy package.
According to the writ filed by the workers the said MOU signed on their behalf by UNICOF is fraudulent and does not have their requisite mandate and input.
They add that the deal will see the workers lose about half of their entitlements due them following the number of years they have worked at the bank.
The decision to lay off workers formed part of moves by Stanchart Global to operate a lean and efficient bank.
The move is expected to affect 15,000 jobs or 17 percent of its workforce.
According to Stanchart Global, the move has become necessary due to its soaring bad loans in emerging markets which hurt its earnings.
But some workers of Stanchart Ghana affected by the move have since been up in arms against the bank over the severance package to be given to them and have subsequently dragged the bank to an Accra high court over the matter.
Court documents cited by Citi Business News revealed the MOU when implemented, will see the workers lose about half of their entitlements due them following the number of years they have worked at the bank.
Portions of the court document stated that ‘the applicants rights are being taken away and the compensation should be commensurate to their years of service, clearly the 17.5 percent years being offered the plaintiffs who have worked close to between 26 to 35 years is unfair and unjust’.
By: Norvan Acquah – Hayford
