PHOTO: Circuit Court in Kakata
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
KAKATA, Liberia- The 13th Judicial Circuit Court in Margibi County presided by Judge Karboi K. Nuta in Margibi County has ruled in the longstanding case between the Retirees of Firestone and Firestone Liberia Management.
The ruling was handed down on Tuesday, June 22, 2021.
According to the Court ruling, the labor law of Liberia prior to the coming in being of the Decent Work Act of 2015, section 2501 thereof provided that an employer is required to pay a retirement pension to an employee that retires from its employ at the age of sixty (60), if the employee has completed fifteen (15) years of continue service or at any age.
The law also says that retirement pension can be paid to an employee if the employee has completed twenty five (25) years of continue service with the employer; and such retirement pension is calculated as forty percent of the monthly average earning of the employee over the last five years of employment and pay in equal monthly installments until the death of the employee.
It was under this law that the petitioners were retired by the respondent.
On March 16, 2019, over 200 retirees staged a three days hunger strike converged from various Counties demanding the management of Firestone to pay their retirees benefits but Firestone Management told to go to NASSCORP because they were responsible for their pension payment but in a communication to the retirees of Firestone Liberia that they and Firestone have reached any agreement about their pension benefits.
One of the retirees collapsed and was taken to Dolo town health Center where he later died without receiving his pension benefits from Firestone.
The deceased on hospital bed and some of the retirees during their strike action.
The respondent’s letter of retirement to the petitioners had two different contents. To some of petitioners (Retirees), respondent indicated in their letters of retirement that respondent will pay a monthly retirement pension, calculated at forty percent of their last monthly salary and that since respondent (Firestone) has made contribution to the pension scheme of co-respondent (NASSCORP), the said petitioners were also entitled to receive retirement pension and or such benefits as defined by the rules and regulations and policy of NASSCORP to other petitioners.
Accordingly, the argument of respondents (Firestone) that PRC decree No one and it’s appendix 14-1(1980) repealed section 2501 of the labor law of Liberia and that the National pension scheme of co-respondent NASSCORP superseded, supplanted and substituted the pension scheme of the labor law is untenable.
As to the argument of respondents (Firestone) that section 2501 and National Social Security and Welfare Corporation Act are inconsistent and contradictory with each other in terms of requirements and also in term of benefits and that under the law, if an act is so repugnant to or contradictory with and irreconcilably in conflict with a prior act and that the two acts cannot be harmonized in order to effect the purpose of their enactment. And it says the latter act operates without any repealing clause as a repealed of the first to the extent of the irreconcilably inconsistency, and this court said the respondent (Firestone) has remedy under the law to have the court declare what the law is based on the perceived inconsistency and contradiction of the law as alleged by the respondent.
The Circuit Court in its ruling said it is in agreement with the petitioners(Retirees) that under Article 20(A) of the 1986 constitution of Liberia, they cannot be deprived of their rights receive pension from co-respondent, Firestone Liberia until death without a hearing judgement consistent with due process of law.
This court also indicated that even after the enactment of the Decent Work Act, 2015, Co-respondent Firestone Liberia continued to pay each of petitioners their retirement.
Pension under section 2501 of the labor law to pay Liberia up to March 1, 2016. Accordingly, Co-respondent Firestone Liberia cannot discontinued its obligation to pay retirement pension to the petitioners without a Court declaration.
The Co-respondent Firestone also contended that the argument of petitioners that the Decent Work Act of 2015 cannot be applicable to petitioners under the doctrine IPOS fact law is absurd for reason that Chapter 26 of the law Labor law was repealed in 1980 by PRC decree No one and it’s Appendix 14-1.
The court disagreed with Co-respondent Firestone Liberia for reason already stated hereinabove. More besides, the Decent Work Act of 2015 clearly provides that said Act would take effect immediately upon publication in had bill.
This Court says that the Decent Work Act of 2015, came into effect on June 26,2015 at the hour of 3:30pm when said was approved consistent with Article 21 (A) of the constitution of Liberia against IPOS fact law that is to say, laws cannot have retroactive effect. So assuming that Decent Work Act of 2015 repealed section 2501 of the Labor law of Liberia which is not the case as indicated hereinabove, it would have been applicable to the petitioners.
Furthermore, the Court said it observed that the Co-respondent Firestone Liberia’s letters of retirement to the petitioners has two different contents.
To some of petitioners respondent indicated in their letters of retirement that respondent will pay a monthly retirement pension calculated 40% of their last monthly salary and that since respondent had made contribution to the pension scheme of co-respondent NASSCORP, and the said petitioners were also entitled to receive retirement pension and or such benefits as defined by the rules and regulations and policy of NASSCORP to other petitioners, the respondent indicated their letters of retirement that they will paid monthly retirement pension calculated.
Also Co-respondent NASSCORP making contribution on behalf of petitioners and it’s employee argued that the two regimes are inconsistent and contradictory with each other in terms of requirements and also in terms of benefits.
Like Co-respondent Firestone Liberia, Co-respondent NASSCORP argued that it is the law that if an act is so repugnant to, or so contradictory of or irreconcilably in conflict with a prior act that the two acts cannot be harmonized in order to effect the purpose their enactment, the later act operates without any repealing clause as it repeal of the first to the extent of the irreconcilable inconsistency.
Therefore, they and Firestone have not reached any agreement to pay Firestone Retirees.
WHEREFORE and in view of the foregoing, this court declare as follows:
That the memoranda dated December 12,2018 and December 17,2018 Captioned Verification of Firestone Pensioners and Retirees pensions’ are hereby declared null and void and of no legal effect.
That petitioners are entitled to receive their full retirement pension from co-respondent Firestone Liberia accordingly, Co-respondent Firestone Liberia is ordered to resume the payment of petitioners’ retirement pension retroactive as of March 1,2016.
That petitioners can under no condition forfeit their retirement pension and Cost of these proceedings ruled against respondents Firestone.
Meanwhile, the management of Firestone has taken exception to the ruling and will take an Appeal to the Supreme Court of Liberia.