The Belize Telecommunications Limited (BTL) is fighting an order granted by Supreme Court Justice John Muria calling on the company to reinstate Mrs. Christine Perriott, general secretary of the Belize Communication Workers’ Union and grade VI Internet technician at BTL. The company terminated Perriott on February 27, but she has gone to the court for a reinstatement, claiming that BTL fired her because of her union activities.
Even before the full hearing, Perriott asked for an interim reinstatement, which she won on Thursday, April 5, but BTL is now appealing that decision.
BTL’s case was based mostly on an affidavit filed by the chairman of BTL’s executive committee, Dean Boyce. However, the court was unconvinced by the claims in Boyce’s affidavit accusing Perriott of poor work performance and negative attitude.
The company has now filed an additional affidavit from director Ediberto Tesecum, who has previously served as the company’s chief executive officer.
Before it can apply to the Court of Appeal, BTL has to get permission from Muria to appeal.
The company argues that given the contents of Tesecum’s affidavit, the appeal has a real prospect of success. Its application also cites the construction and interpretation of the Trade Union and Employers’ Organizations (Registration, Recognition and Status) Act, Chapter 304 of the Laws of Belize, as the second grounds of its appeal.
BTL’s application goes before Justice Muria on Tuesday, April 24, when the judge is scheduled to also hear an application by Perriott to hold Boyce in contempt, allegedly for not abiding by the court’s order to reinstate her until the court concludes the substantive hearing of her case.
The order was made on Thursday, April 5, and when Perriott turned up to work on Tuesday, April 10, she was told that she could not access the premises and would be put on “special paid leave.”
BTL further argues that since Perriott was paid almost $20,000 upon her termination, including over $12,000 in ex gratia payments, she would not receive any more money for 25 weeks. BTL’s position is that placing Perriott on leave does not violate the reinstatement order, but Perriott, who thinks she should be allowed to go to work and function as a technician, is challenging this interpretation, as well as BTL’s refusal to pay her for the first 25 weeks after her termination.