IDT awards hotel’s ex-worker $36m for wrongful dismissal
Published:Wednesday | January 1, 2025 | 12:07 AMKimone Francis/Senior Staff Reporter
The Industrial Disputes Tribunal (IDT) has delivered a blow to Moon Palace Jamaica Grande, ruling that it pays a former employee US$230,000 or J$36 million in compensation for unjustifiable dismissal.
The 20-page ruling was handed down on December 18. The former employee, American Severin Alba, was dismissed in 2017.
The tribunal looked at whether Alba voluntarily resigned his position or was constructively dismissed by the hotel. If he was dismissed, was his dismissal justified? And if dismissed, whether he would be entitled to any compensation.
Alba’s dismissal stemmed from a disagreement between him and a director at the Mexican-owned hotel, based in Ocho Rios, St Ann.
Alba said subsequent to the disagreement, which concerned decisions that would adversely impact his sales commission, he was called to a meeting and told his services would be terminated with immediate effect.
He was given three hours to leave the hotel, where he lived as an employee. However, this decision was later revised and time was given to make other arrangements for accommodation and to book a flight.
Alba, who was employed in a sales position as a ‘front to back closer’, was on a fixed-term contract for one year which began in March 2017. He was dismissed in July 2017.
Alba said he was called to a meeting and forced to sign a resignation letter. He said this was the only way he was guaranteed to receive outstanding commission payments owed to him.
He later said Moon Palace failed to make a final of two payments.
Moon Palace, which operates under Operadora Palace Resorts (Ja) Ltd, argued that Alba resigned from his job. The hotel said, approximately 10 months later, he alleged that he was unfairly dismissed.
The hotel maintained that Alba voluntarily resigned and sought to point a finger at his credibility.
The IDT said that, during the hearing, Moon Palace introduced evidence regarding the credibility of Alba, accusing him of providing false information to the hotel upon employment, including a forged university certificate.
“There is no evidence that prior to these proceedings before the tribunal, this matter had any impact on either the engagement or termination of Mr Alba’s employment. In any event, the tribunal is of the view that the hotel had a responsibility to carry out its due diligence upon Mr Alba’s engagement and not after termination of his services.
“Since it did not fall within the terms of reference, the tribunal did not place any weight on this evidence during its deliberations,” it said.
It said there was also contention as to whether Alba should have been paid commissions after his employment ended, based on a clause in his contract of employment.
The IDT said there was uncontroverted evidence that the hotel and Alba entered into discussions and mutually agreed that payment of commissions would be made for the period in dispute.
The IDT said that, having reviewed the evidence presented, it found that Alba was “constructively dismissed” with approximately seven months remaining on his contract.
Further, the IDT said the dismissal was “unjustifiable”.
It said Alba was not found to be in breach of his contract; that he was dismissed without the required statutory notice; and was not allowed to complete his contract of employment.
The IDT said he is entitled to compensation and, in accordance with section 12 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act, awarded him US$230,000 in compensation.
Karen Dabdoub, one of the attorneys who represented Moon Palace in the matter, said she could not confirm whether the hotel would be appealing the ruling.
She also declined further comment.
“This is an important case. It’s the first time that the tribunal has heard a dispute where the employee alleged constructive dismissal,” said attorney-at-law Gavin Goffe, who represented Alba.
He noted that it was a strenuous process, getting to a ruling, and pointed to the seven years over which the matter had been in dispute.
“We actually had to go to the Supreme Court first because the minister of labour at the time didn’t think that the tribunal had jurisdiction to even hear one of these types of cases… . It was an extremely long series of hearings, but we are pleased with the outcome,” said Goffe.
He said he believed the tribunal took its time and deliberated carefully, that the award was fair and that Alba was looking forward to the “turning of the page” in the matter with the hotel settling.