Juba High Court sets May 15 for UAP Insurance case
On Friday, Presiding Judge Francis Amum postponed the hearing, setting a new date of May 15 to allow both parties time to submit evidence regarding an alleged loan to staff and the calculation of employee benefits.
“The court has adjourned the session to May 15 to review the calculations we’ve prepared. The court will compare them, and if disputes persist, a decision will be made,” said plaintiff’s attorney, Marko Reech.
Reech stated that UAP’s managing director acknowledged the wrongful termination of employees, leading to a settlement of six months’ salaries for former staff.
“We’ve proceeded with the cross-examination, and the managing director has confirmed key issues, including unfair termination, for which he paid six months’ compensation,” Reech explained.
He also addressed a disputed loan issue, noting that UAP initially claimed repayment in hard currency from three of his clients, a claim later proven false.
“The managing director presented the loan in dollars but later admitted it was in pounds. The court has asked us to clarify the loan and benefit calculations,” Reech said.
Reech emphasised that his clients challenge the company’s current benefit calculations.
“The company’s calculations are disputed by the former employees. The court has requested our calculations, which my clients have prepared but did not bring to the session,” he noted.
When asked about a discrimination charge, Reech clarified that while the focus has been on settling employment contracts and wrongful terminations, discrimination issues remain unresolved and will be addressed later.
“The discrimination claims are still active. We haven’t addressed them yet, as we’re focusing on confirming the employment contracts and unfair terminations. We’ll tackle discrimination next, particularly the targeting of association leaders,” he said.
Last October, UAP and its national staff clashed over allegations of unfair treatment and wage disparities between national and foreign expatriate employees.
This led approximately 70 national staff to stage a sit-in strike, halting UAP’s operations.
Subsequently, UAP dismissed at least ten national staff for demanding better pay, defying a Ministry of Labour order to reinstate them.
This prompted the UAP National Staff Association (UNSA) to file a legal case against the insurance company.
Payment disparity between national employees and their foreign counterparts is a common practice with several foreign-controlled companies in South Sudan.
Section 6 of the South Sudan Labour Act, 2017, prohibits discrimination, whether direct or indirect, against an employee or job applicant in any work policy or practice.
This is reinforced by Section 14 of the Constitution of South Sudan, 2011, which states that all persons are equal before the law without discrimination based on race, ethnic origin, colour, sex, language, religion, political opinion, birth, locality, or social status.
Section 8 of the Act mandates that every employee is entitled to equal remuneration for work of equal value, regardless of gender or other discriminatory factors.
Under this section, employers are required to take necessary steps to ensure equal remuneration for work of equal value. Any unilateral decision by an employer that violates this right is deemed null and void.
sudanspost.com