Skip to main content

ERT Decision Between Pauline Wood (Claimant) & JADA BUILDERS INC.(Respondent)

 This case involves a dispute between Pauline Wood, the claimant, and Jada Builders Inc., the respondent, which was brought before the Employment Rights Tribunal in Barbados. The claimant, an 83-year-old maid who had worked for the respondent for 18 years, alleged unfair dismissal. The respondent argued that the claimant had reached the company's retirement age of 66 and was retired due to a slowdown in projects. The tribunal examined the issues of whether the claimant was entitled to protection under the Employment Rights Act and whether her termination with one day's notice was unfair. The tribunal found that the claimant, despite being past retirement age, was still protected under the act and that the reason given for her dismissal was not valid. It also determined that the procedural fairness leading to her termination was flawed. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's age, rather than a decline in business, was the real reason for her dismissal. The respondent's practice of not documenting mutually consented terms for employees working past retirement age was criticized for facilitating dismissals without proper consideration of the law.


The Employment Rights Tribunal in Barbados handled a case involving Pauline Wood, who filed a complaint against Jada Builders Inc., her former employer. Pauline, an 83-year-old maid, claimed that she was unfairly dismissed after working for the company for 18 years. Jada Builders argued that Pauline had reached the company's retirement age of 66 and was retired due to a slowdown in projects. The tribunal examined two main issues: whether Pauline was still protected under the Employment Rights Act despite being past retirement age, and whether her termination with only one day's notice was unfair.


The tribunal determined that the claimant, despite being past the retirement age, was still entitled to the protection provided by the Employment Rights Act. The act did not limit its applicability based on age, and it would be inconsistent to provide protection against age discrimination while simultaneously restricting its applicability based on age. The tribunal concluded that if an employee continues to work beyond the retirement age by mutual agreement, they are afforded full protection under the act.


Regarding the reason for dismissal, the burden of proof fell on the respondent, Jada Builders Inc. The tribunal found that the claimant's termination was not related to her capability or conduct. The reason given by Jada Builders was a "slowing down of projects," which could be considered a justifiable reason for termination under certain circumstances. However, Jada Builders failed to provide evidence of a reduction in workload or a corresponding reduction in workforce, as required by the law. The respondent also did not follow the statutory procedural requirements for dismissals based on redundancy.


The tribunal further found that the procedure leading to the claimant's termination was flawed. Pauline received only one day's verbal notice, which was admitted by Jada Builders. However, there was no evidence of a termination letter being given to the claimant or proper documentation of the payments made to her. The termination letter also failed to advise the claimant of her right to appeal. Based on these procedural shortcomings, the tribunal concluded that the dismissal fell short of the statutory requirements and was therefore unfair.


In its discussion, the tribunal criticized Jada Builders' practice of not documenting mutually consented terms for employees working past retirement age. This practice allowed the company to dismiss employees who had surpassed retirement age with minimal notice and without considering their rights under the law. The tribunal found that the claimant's age, rather than a decline in business, was the true reason for her dismissal, as inadvertently admitted by the respondent's representative during the hearing.


In summary, the Employment Rights Tribunal ruled in favor of Pauline Wood, the claimant, stating that she was entitled to protection under the Employment Rights Act despite being past. The Claimant was represented by Caswell Franklyn of Unity Workers Union. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Employee Goes Berserk and Explodes at the Rubis Coverley Service Station Pump in Barbados: Was This a Preventable Workplace Breakdown?

Image
A Workplace Commentary on the Rubis Coverley Incident By  Peter MacD Earle BSc, LLM, Employment Law Consultant On Friday, May 17, 2025, Barbadians awoke to disturbing news involving the aftermath of a workplace conflict that escalated dramatically. Daniel Arnold Vincent Belle, 38, a former employee of the Rubis Coverley gas station in Christ Church, appeared in the District “B” Magistrates’ Court and admitted to causing extensive damage to the station—an estimated $7,000 worth—just days after his dismissal from the company. The incident involved the smashing of a glass door, breaking two windows, damaging a display unit, and tearing off seven fuel pump nozzles. Surveillance footage led to Belle’s arrest in Oistins. While this act of destruction was clearly criminal, the context in which it occurred raises serious concerns about workplace conflict, employer responsibilities, and the role of mental health in employment relations. . Let me be clear from the outset: I do not have any a...
Read more

Barbados' Minimum Wage Time Bomb: Are Businesses Being Set Up to Fail?

Image
   Peter MacD Earle BSc, LLM Employment Law Leicester De Montfort Law School Effective June 1, 2025, Barbados will implement a new minimum wage of $420 per week, a 23.5% increase from the current $340. In addition, legislation proposes an automatic 2% annual wage increase starting in January 2026. But beneath this progressive façade lies a stark, structural truth: Barbados has neither the machinery to enforce the law nor the political will to protect the most vulnerable. While this policy signals social justice on paper, in practice it could collapse under its own contradictions—and set workers, employers, and the economy up for failure. ________________________________________ The Illusion of Legal Protection While the government trumpets the wage hike as a win for working-class families, Barbados remains woefully unequipped to enforce the new standard. Consider: • Thousands of workers never received the current $340 minimum wage. • Many will not receive the new $420 rate...
Read more

Former BWA Boss in Barbados Fired from WASA After $13.4M Plan Collapses

Image
  By Peter MacD Earle BSc. LLM | Employment Law Consultant | June 2025 From BWA to WASA: The Rise and Fall of Keithroy Halliday St. Kitts-born Keithroy Halliday was appointed General Manager of the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) on February 15, 2017, bringing a strong track record in strategic leadership and regional public sector reform. Over the next seven years, he would become a defining figure in the BWA’s modernization efforts—managing national emergencies such as the South Coast sewage crisis and spearheading an island-wide mains replacement initiative. By 2020, Halliday had risen to Acting Chief Executive Officer, a role he held during a period of deep organizational restructuring. His resignation in August 2024 marked the end of a significant chapter in the BWA’s evolution—and the beginning of a controversial new role abroad as CEO of Trinidad and Tobago’s Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA), from which he would be abruptly dismissed less than a year later amid sweeping po...
Read more