Chiyangwa’s woes mount

News
BUSINESSMAN Philip Chiyangwa’s woes continue to mount after a former principal at his elite Divaris Makaharis School in Harare won a second labour dispute involving nearly $20 000 in unpaid salaries.

BUSINESSMAN Philip Chiyangwa’s woes continue to mount after a former principal at his elite Divaris Makaharis School in Harare won a second labour dispute involving nearly $20 000 in unpaid salaries.

Christopher Tapera won the $19 721 award on July 17 following an arbitration hearing at the Labour Court presided over by Alpha Gurupira.

The award was subsequently registered as a High Court order on August 6, under case number HC6677/14.

Part of the ruling reads: “In the final analysis and having considered written submissions from both parties, I make my determination as follows: Respondent to pay claimant (Tapera) a total of $19 721 being net back pay (salary and benefits after tax and statutory deduction) for the period between his suspension, January 23 2014 and date of resignation which is May 27 2014, following his reinstatement.”

The Deputy Sheriff recently attached property valued at over $24 623,23 at the school following a writ of execution after Tapera won his first arbitration award over salary arrears of $24 263,34, accrued between May and December 2013.

Tapera was suspended from the school on January 23, but was subsequently reinstated without loss of salary and benefits on May 19. He opted to resign on May 27.

The school administration had argued in its response filed by Harare lawyer Lloyd Mhishi that Tapera’s claims pertaining to airtime, fuel, car hire rates and clothing had no specified values in the contract.

They also argued that Tapera opted not to stay in the house provided by the school and that the rental increase from $1 100 to $1 300 was not authorised.

They also argued that the arbitral award was subject of a pending appeal at the Labour Court.

Although the tribunal acknowledged the pending appeal, it noted that the school did not provide evidence to that effect and did not state whether the appeal specifically related to the issue of back pay.