Industrial Court Dismisses Ex-Banker Entitlement Claim Against Keystone Bank
Hon. Justice Zaynab Bashir of the Portharcourt Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court has dismissed the entitlement claim filed by one former banker, Justina against Keystone Bank Ltd for lacking merit.
The Court held that Justina failed to demonstrate that the Human Capital Policies and Procedure Manual Revised 2013 is the applicable manual pursuant to which she was to be paid terminal benefits.
From facts, the Claimant, Justina, had pleaded that she was employed by Bank PHB, and following its acquisition, Keystone Bank Ltd issued her a Letter of Employment as an Assistant Banking Officer on August 5, 2011. Justina averred that to allay the rumours of the bank placing staff of former Bank PHB on probation, Keystone Bank Ltd issued a memo clarifying that the Bank has assumed the years of service of the legacy staff.
Justina added that her employment was terminated on the 21st of April, 2017 upon which she was paid salary “in lieu of notice” and “earned allowance at exit” without paying her Gratuity, End-of-service, and other exit fringe benefits provided in the bank’s Human Capital Policies and Procedures (HCP) Manual, revised 2013.
In defence, the Defendant- Keystone Bank Ltd added that the bank offered Justina fresh employment, which she accepted unconditionally and the said letter made no mention of the assumption of employees of Bank PHB. Keystone Bank further stated that the policy applicable at the time of Justina’s exit is the Human Capital Policies and Procedure Manual 2013 (with 2015 Amendments).
The Keystone Bank maintained that the bank has no contractual obligation to pay Justina the Gratuity and Long Service Award claimed other than payments already made to the ex-staff.
The learned counsel to Keystone Bank posited that Justina filed this action against the 5 years window acceptable under the Limitation Law of Rivers State in contract actions, and the said letter of employment issued to Justina makes no provision for gratuity and long service award, and when Justina employment was terminated, she unconditionally accepted the termination and collected her entitlements.
In opposition, the counsel to Justina contended that the suit is not statute-barred on the ground that the suit is one that borders on the Pension Reform Act and the injury is continuous as long as the bank failed to pay his client gratuity and that Justina had initially filed a suit at the High Court of Rivers state within the 5 years period which kept the limitation period frozen assuming the matter was to be considered to be one that can be statute barred.
Counsel added that the Human Capital Policies and Procedures Manual revised 2013 supersedes the Letter of Employment such that the provision of Gratuity and Long Service Award in the Document takes precedence over the provisions of the Letter of Employment as both documents must be read together.
In a well-considered judgment, the presiding Judge, Justice Zaynab Bashir dismissed the objection and restated that debt arising from claim of salaries and work done cannot be caught up by statute of limitation, and a claim for gratuity and long service award all come from work done.
Justice Zaynab held that it is immaterial that the instant suit falls under the ambit of the Pension Reforms Act, and the institution of the suit at the High Court of Rivers state within the period less the five years makes the time computation to stay frozen.
However, the Court held that Justina has not on the strength of her case proved that the Human Capital Policies and Procedure Manual Revised 2013 is the applicable manual pursuant to which she was to be paid terminal benefit.
“On the balance of probability, it is incongruous to hold that the Claimant is entitled to gratuity and long service award under the 2013 revised Policy when her employment was terminated in 2017 and in the face of the 2015 revised Policy which makes no provision for gratuity and Long Service Award.” The Court ruled.
