Judgment No. SC 26/18 2
Civil Appeal No. SC 164/16
In 2009 the appellant offered increments to all its section managers in the fifty
branches it operated nationwide based on monthly sales performance of the respective branches.
In order to give effect to this the appellant grouped the branches into four categories. The branch
which recorded the highest sales would earn its managers a 20 percent bonus, the second highest
15 percent, the third 10 percent with the lowest earning 5 percent. Based on this formula the
Lobengula branch received a bonus of 15 percent during the period in question.
On 22 November 2011, the respondents addressed a letter to the appellant’s
Managing Director in which they alleged that they had discovered that since January 2010, some
section Managers were being paid a monthly salary that was higher than what the respondents
were earning. They also stated that they had previously written to the Human Resources OfficerSouthern Region and the Human Resources Manager concerning their grievance but they had not
received a response.
There was no response from the Managing Director and in January 2012 the
respondents lodged a complaint of unfair labour practice with a Labour Officer. They claimed the
difference between their salaries and what the highest performers were being paid. The parties
were invited to attend conciliation proceedings which failed to achieve a positive result and
consequently a certificate of no settlement was issued. Thereafter, the matter was referred to
compulsory arbitration for the arbitrator to determine whether the respondents were entitled to
back-pay and the quantum thereof.