HomeLocal NewsPG employee demands $73m in backpay

PG employee demands $73m in backpay


PG INDUSTRIES marketing director Nkululeko Mabhena, who was reinstated recently following a protracted legal battle, has issued summons against his employer for them to pay him $73 million in salary arrears and other benefits befitting his position.

Report by Richard Muponde, Senior Court Reporter

He issued the summons on Monday this week. Mabhena was reinstated by PG Industries to the position of marketing director/executive head of marketing department at  Zimboards Products with effect from February 28, 2009 after Bulawayo High Court judge Justice Lawrence Kamocha issued an order to that effect.
But the court dismissed Mabhena’s initial claim of $53 million in backpay.

However, after being reinstated, Mabhena is now arguing that the company has not been paying him his dues in tandem with the position he occupies resulting in him filing the lawsuit against  PG Industries under case number HC3432/12.

PG Industries (Zimbabwe) Limited, PG Zimboard Products Pvt Limited, PG Industries (Zimbabwe) Ltd chief executive officers and Manica Boards and Doors (Pvt) Ltd were cited as 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents respectively.

Mabhena wants his monies to be calculated from the time the court reinstated him in 2000 to date and also for the company to disclose benefits and packages of directors, including housing benefits and vehicles, among others.

“Alternatively to claims (a) to (g) above, an order in terms of section 19 of the High Court Act appointing KPMG Chartered Accountants or Messrs P Ndlovu and Chartered Accountants to investigate and avail to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants’ directors’ benefits, salary due to the plaintiff in terms of Order HB 25.07 and present a report to the court,” read the summons.

“An order that an actuary be appointed to deal with the plaintiff’s actual or contribution towards the pension and the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants be ordered to pay to the AON Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd company and National Social Security Authority the money equivalent to what would have accumulated to the plaintiff’s account for his backpay benefits and compute the plaintiff’s accumulated benefits from 1 March 1996 to date of reinstatement up to date of audit report. The defendants unlawfully terminated the plaintiff’s pension contract.”

Recent Posts

Stories you will enjoy

Recommended reading