13 SSC managers sue employer
Thirteen managers at the Social Security Commission (SSC) are entangled in a legal battle with their employer over alleged unfair labour practices and discrimination, with the group claiming they are owed almost N$1.7 million in unpaid salary increments.
The commission is accused of failing to fully implement a 6.5% salary increment for employees, excluding the executive committee, which was sanctioned by former labour minister Erkki Nghimtina in 2019.
The managers claimed the commission unfairly implemented the directive from the minister, adding: “In 2020/21, SSC gave 6.5% salary increase to D3 middle managers (known as regional branch managers on grade D3 who are part of the bargaining unit), but not to other D3 middle managers who only received 4.5%.
“D4 managers who are part of middle management were also excluded on the same basis.”
They dragged their employer to the labour court in March claiming unfair labour practices, disclosure of information, discrimination and unilateral change of employment terms.
The applicants argue that they are entitled to a further 0.6% for the 2020-21 and 6% for the 2021-22 financial years respectively.
They now want the labour court to compel their employer to pay them retrospectively for the salary increases.
Seeking relief
“The applicants are seeking relief, declaring the second respondent’s (SSC CEO Milka Mungunda) refusal to execute the minister’s directive as being insubordination, insolence, gross negligence and failing with her fiduciary duties to act in the interest of the company,” the employees said in their court papers.
They are also calling for the court to force the company to “pay the cost for acting in a frivolous and vexatious manner by defending these proceedings, knowing the application of the salary increase was indeed incorrect and discriminative”.
This is despite the commission having earlier told them that no approval was granted for all employees on the D3 grade to be granted the same percentage as the bargaining unit.
The managers are represented by Olsen Kahiriri from Kahiriri Consultancy.
Kahiriri said the commission has not been responsive to attempts made by the aggrieved party to resolve the matter outside the courts.
“It is weird that SSC is ready to spend money on legal fees to defend their discriminatory actions instead of sorting it out amicably.”
Misunderstanding
In email correspondences between the aggrieved group and the SSC, the company attempted to clarify the matter, which it calls a “misunderstanding”.
In an email dated 23 November 2020, the commission’s then general manager for human resources and strategy Yulanda Marais wrote to the affected employees, saying “it seems the majority of divisional managers expected to receive an annual increase of 6.5% like the bargaining staff and not just 4.5% as approved by the board and minister”.
She added: “At the time, the Namibia Public Workers Union discussion confirmed the redefinition of the bargaining unit with D1, D2 and the six branch managers at D3 included. When the current negotiation agreement was signed in 2014, there was no D3/D4/D5 in the company structure yet.”
Marais said the company did not receive ministerial and board approval to pay more than 4.5% to management, however, Mungunda has the authority to decide on the salaries of the employees under D3 and D4.
The two parties will lock horns on 24 June for an arbitration hearing.
The commission is accused of failing to fully implement a 6.5% salary increment for employees, excluding the executive committee, which was sanctioned by former labour minister Erkki Nghimtina in 2019.
The managers claimed the commission unfairly implemented the directive from the minister, adding: “In 2020/21, SSC gave 6.5% salary increase to D3 middle managers (known as regional branch managers on grade D3 who are part of the bargaining unit), but not to other D3 middle managers who only received 4.5%.
“D4 managers who are part of middle management were also excluded on the same basis.”
They dragged their employer to the labour court in March claiming unfair labour practices, disclosure of information, discrimination and unilateral change of employment terms.
The applicants argue that they are entitled to a further 0.6% for the 2020-21 and 6% for the 2021-22 financial years respectively.
They now want the labour court to compel their employer to pay them retrospectively for the salary increases.
Seeking relief
“The applicants are seeking relief, declaring the second respondent’s (SSC CEO Milka Mungunda) refusal to execute the minister’s directive as being insubordination, insolence, gross negligence and failing with her fiduciary duties to act in the interest of the company,” the employees said in their court papers.
They are also calling for the court to force the company to “pay the cost for acting in a frivolous and vexatious manner by defending these proceedings, knowing the application of the salary increase was indeed incorrect and discriminative”.
This is despite the commission having earlier told them that no approval was granted for all employees on the D3 grade to be granted the same percentage as the bargaining unit.
The managers are represented by Olsen Kahiriri from Kahiriri Consultancy.
Kahiriri said the commission has not been responsive to attempts made by the aggrieved party to resolve the matter outside the courts.
“It is weird that SSC is ready to spend money on legal fees to defend their discriminatory actions instead of sorting it out amicably.”
Misunderstanding
In email correspondences between the aggrieved group and the SSC, the company attempted to clarify the matter, which it calls a “misunderstanding”.
In an email dated 23 November 2020, the commission’s then general manager for human resources and strategy Yulanda Marais wrote to the affected employees, saying “it seems the majority of divisional managers expected to receive an annual increase of 6.5% like the bargaining staff and not just 4.5% as approved by the board and minister”.
She added: “At the time, the Namibia Public Workers Union discussion confirmed the redefinition of the bargaining unit with D1, D2 and the six branch managers at D3 included. When the current negotiation agreement was signed in 2014, there was no D3/D4/D5 in the company structure yet.”
Marais said the company did not receive ministerial and board approval to pay more than 4.5% to management, however, Mungunda has the authority to decide on the salaries of the employees under D3 and D4.
The two parties will lock horns on 24 June for an arbitration hearing.
Comments