Simpson Bay Resort case headed towards stalemate

December 05, 2011 10:48 AM

PHILIPSBURG--The legal battle between Simpson Bay Resort Management Company (SBRMC)/Royal Resorts and Workers Institute for Organised Labour (WIFOL) seems to be bogging down in repetitious judicial arguing after the Court of Appeals ruled Friday to suspend the execution of the November 25 ruling of the Court of First Instance until it has made a final decision in the appeal case.

Last week Friday the judge of the Court of First Instance suspended implementation of two Appeals Court rulings, issued November 4 and 7, that could have had dramatic consequences for almost 200 workers of the former Pelican Resort Club to whom SBRMC no longer would be obligated to pay salaries.

The resort immediately filed a case against last week’s ruling in which it was ordered to adhere to regulations stipulated in the collective labour agreements (CLAs) closed with WIFOL for line personnel and supervisors of Pelican Resort Club and the resort’s middle management and administrative personnel. In case of noncompliance it would have to pay US $25,000 per day.

In the contested ruling the judge further indicated that the resort had to adhere to the CLAs until the High Court in The Hague had ruled in the cassation case; a procedure that may take a year or longer.

The cassation case concerns a February 8 ruling of the Court of Appeals that declared null and void a ruling in which the resort was ordered to continue paying salaries to 182 workers the resort had been attempting to dismiss.

The complicated legal battle hinges on the question whether the Appeals Court rulings of early November contain legal errors that would render them invalid. WIFOL’s lawyers are convinced Friday’s ruling was based on the same mistake and is therefore also erroneous.

“This ruling is not about the execution of a verdict,” said WIFOL’s lawyer Wim van Sambeek. “This is about the workers’ interests versus those of the resort. It is illegal not to fulfil your obligations as an employer.”

Van Sambeek said the next legal move would be discussed during a meeting with WIFOL President Theophilus Thompson today, Saturday.

“We could be filing a new injunction, or file a new petition with theAppeals Courtto lift the suspension,” Van Sambeek stated. “We keep fighting for the people as long as there are no talks about a CLA.”

SBRMC’s attorney Jairo Bloem stated WIFOL’s procedures against the verdicts could not be some sort of disguised appeal. Bloem said the Appeals Court decisions of early November stating that his clients were not responsible for paying salaries to WIFOL’s members were judicially correct and “not flawed like WIFOL and its attorneys would have the members of WIFOL and the general public believe.”

“This would be the third verdict of our Court of Appeals that, according to WIFOL and its attorneys, is judicially flawed,” said Bloem.

Faced with the possibility of more legal action from the side of the union, his clients have decided to “regretfully” postpone the outlining of the “labour plan, policy, and job offers of the resort to the members of WIFOL until further notice,” said Bloem.

He said the union’s continued actions were severely hindering and damaging the resort’s operations. He claimed those operations could yield some US $52 million per year in gross revenue.

(Source: The Daily Herald)

3 December 2011

In this case Simpson Bay Resort Management Company (SBRMC) is represented by attorney Jairo Bloem of Bloem $ Associates. Workers Institute for Organised Labour (WIFOL) is being represented by Maarten Le Poole and Wim van Sambeek of HBN Law.