The Protection of Employment Act (cont’d- Prohibitions against Termination)

“Don’t expect to have a job waiting for you if you go complaining to the Labour Department.” I am still dreaming of the day when all employers will treat their employees the way they want their external customers treated. I am taken aback by the fact that there are still employers who manage their employees with threats and intimidation and then lambast them for giving customers lousy service.

Several scholars, including Graen and Uhl-Bien, 1995, and Dulebohn et al., 2012, argue that there is definitely a link between the relationship leaders have with their employees and the employees’ attitude toward work. The leader-member exchange (LMX) is defined as a mutual give-and-take that occurs over time between the leader and employees. It is reported that the better the quality of the relationship between the leader and employees, the better employees perform. Hu et al., 2018, conducted an experiment involving 308 Chinese employees, and it was determined that LMX improved employees’ behaviour. Furthermore, Chan and Yeung, 2015, also conducted a research of 314 leaders and their employees and also concluded that LMX positively contributed to employees’ behaviour.

When there exists a low quality relationship between leaders and employees it often leads to tension and wrongful termination. Today we continue our series on the Protection of Employment Act, 2003 as we look at Prohibitions against termination. According to the Act, there are certain things that an employer should not terminate an employee for. These include becoming a member of a trade union or participating in trade union activities. This can either be outside of normal work hours or during work hours with the consent of the employer. In some organizations “trade union” is a curse word. An employee who is pro-trade union in a non-unionized work environment could be seen as an instigator, a trouble maker and someone the organization needs to be rid of before they corrupt the entire workforce. However, under the Act, that is not reason to terminate the services of an employee.

The Act also prohibits the termination of an employee for the following reasons:

• An employee who is acting as an employee representative or seeking office as such.
• An employee who files a complaint against the employer. Or, if for example, the employer is being investigated for allegedly breaking the law and the employee is asked to participate in the proceeding by giving evidence against the employer. • The Act also prohibits the termination of an employee because of religion, political opinion, colour, nationality, social origin, sex, race or marital status.

Additionally, the Act prohibits the termination of an employee because of absence from work to perform jury service. Absence because of maternity leave, once the employee produces a certified certificate. Absence due to illness or injury once the employee submits a sick certificate by the third day.

Finally, the Act prohibits the termination of an employee for “reasonable absence from work due to family emergencies or responsibilities.” One may argue as to what is reasonable.

Reasonableness is subjective and what may be reasonable to one employer may be considered unreasonable to another.

However, it is important to note that it is expected for an employee to, from time to time, be faced with an emergency situation that may result in absence from work. This should not result in termination of the employee. Where an employer is concerned that an employee is abusing the employer’s consideration, the employer should seek to find out why. When an employee looks for reasons to stay away from work it is usually an indication that the employee is disengaged, if that is the reason, the employer needs to ensure that the working environment is such it boosts employees’ emotional commitment to the organization. It is also important that there is a balance between reward and reprimand.

Join us again next week as we look at Remedies for unfair dismissal.

Source: Talya N. Bauer, Berrin Erdogan, The Oxford Handbook of Leader-Member Exchange, chapter 1.

The Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Protection of Employment Act, 2003.

Visit us at www.searchlight.vc or https://www.facebook.com/Searchlight1.We’ll help you get noticed.