Reprieve has come the way of an employee sacked by the Port Harcourt Electricity Distribution (PHED) for what it described as “underperformance and not meeting targets” as a court has ordered the company to pay him three years basic salary as damages.
Justice Salisu Danjidda of the Uyo Division of the National Industrial Court last Friday declared the termination of the employment of Mr Dennis Ifiok employment as wrongful and unjustified.
The court held that PHED failed to follow due process as required by law in the termination and ordered the company to pay him his basic salary for a period of three years as general damages within 30 days.
According to available court documents, Mr Ifiok submitted that he was employed by the company in 2013, had his employment confirmed in 2015, and served diligently for about nine years with his performance appraisal consistently not less than 80%.
He added that his employment was terminated on the ground of consistent underperformance and inability to meet targets despite never violating the terms of his employment and without being afforded a fair hearing as required by the company’s conditions of service.
In its defence, the distribution company stated that Mr Ifiok’s employment was terminated as a result of his consistent underperformance and inability to meet targets.
It added that the performance of Mr Ifiok was evaluated, queries were issued to him for underperformance, and that having paid Mr Ifiok his full entitlement upon termination, the court could not order his reinstatement and that the monetary claims sought by him had not been proved.
Opposing the arguments, Ifiok’s counsel stated that the company failed to establish the alleged underperformance or show that his client was afforded a fair hearing in accordance with its conditions of service before terminating his employment and urged the court to grant the reliefs sought.
Delivering judgment, Justice Danjidda held that the relationship between Mr Ifiok and Port Harcourt Electricity Distribution was governed by their contract of employment and the company’s conditions of service, and that the parties are bound by the terms of their agreement, which the court cannot rewrite.
He held that the company failed to establish that it complied with the procedure prescribed under its conditions of service before terminating Mr Ifiok’s employment, particularly the provisions requiring investigation of the alleged underperformance, warnings, performance improvement programmes and fair hearing before termination.
The judge further held that there was no evidence before the court that the alleged underperformance was investigated to determine whether it resulted from incapacity or attitude, nor was there evidence of any warnings, performance improvement programmes or disciplinary proceedings.
The judge stated further that the termination of Mr Ifiok’s employment on the ground of underperformance without giving him the opportunity to be heard was not justified and was therefore wrongful.
