Individual dockworkers who are not directly employed by terminal operators cannot bring an action to enforce provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, the National Industrial Court has held.
Individual dockworkers who are not directly employed by terminal operators cannot bring an action to enforce provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, the National Industrial Court has held.
Justice A. Ibrahim of the National Industrial Court sitting last week in Calabar, Cross Rivers State, struck out the name of a Calabar port operator; ECM Terminals Limited as well as those of the Nigerian Maritime Adminsdtrtaion and Safety Agency (NIMASA) and Nigerian Ports Authourity from a suit brought against them by a group of 17 aggrieved dockworkers represented by Bassey Ogar, James Ofere and Jams Amok.
The aggrieved dockworkers had approached the court among other things for an order granting them the sum of N180Million being their alleged entitlements based on agreements made in 2008 between the Association of Private Operators of Seaports Terminals and the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria
The dockworkers who also joined their union in the same suit over alleged the non- performance of the 2008 agreements which they claimed entitled them to certain minimum sums totaling N180million.
Upon a preliminary objection filed on behalf ECM Terminals by its solicitors, Messrs. Akabogu & Associates, the court ruled that the 6th Defendant; ECM Terminals Limited was not shown to be a signatory to the Agreement and as such could not be proceeded against just for being a member of the Association of Private Operators of Sea Seaports Terminals.
The court also held that not being direct employees of the terminal, or standing in any other direct legal relationship with the terminal, the dockworkers are not in a position to derive any rights under the collective bargaining agreement which they are relying upon.
Justice A. Ibrahim in his ruling stated that: “This position of the Claimants (Dockworkers) falls short of the legal principle well established that an Agreement can only be enforced by the parties to such an Agreement. I have carefully examined the Statement of Claim, particularly paragraph 1 thereof and it is evident that the claimants are relying on the said Agreement but have not spelt out how they become entitled to benefit from the provisions of the said Agreement. I note that in their argument they have submitted that they are not just seeking to benefit from the provisions of the Agreement but also to make the 6th Defendant perform its obligation under it as a Private Seaport Operator. However, to maintain a suit before a Court of law, a party must be able to show the existence of the legal relation between it and the person it is suing which must be capable of being enforced.”
Following a similar line of reasoning the court therefore stuck out the names of ECM Terminal Limited, NPA and NIMASA from the suit.
Discussion about this post