Aunika Webster-Lake v The Attorney General of Anguilla
| Jurisdiction | Anguilla |
| Judge | Moise, J. |
| Judgment Date | 01 November 2023 |
| Neutral Citation | AI 2023 HC 12 |
| Court | High Court (Saint Christopher, Nevis And Anguilla) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Docket Number | CLAIM NO. AXAHCV 2019/0019 |
His Lordship, The Honourable Justice Ermin Moise
CLAIM NO. AXAHCV 2019/0019
EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
(CIVIL)
Ms. Tara Carter with her Mrs. Keesha Carty of counsel for the Claimant
Dr. Francis Alexis KC with him Mr. Sasha Courtney of counsel for the Defendant
This is a claim for damages for constructive and/or unfair dismissal. The claimant has claimed a breach of her employment contract pursuant to an appointment form dated 16 th October 2013 and the General Orders of the Anguilla Public Service. It is alleged that the Government of Anguilla had failed to provide a safe place of work; a safe system of work; adequate plant and equipment and competent staff. On account of these failures, the claimant resigned from her post on 11 th January, 2018 and claimed that she was constructively dismissed. Having examined the facts and submissions presented to the Court, I have decided that the case should be dismissed with costs to the defendant. These are the reasons for my decision.
On 16 th October, 2013, Mrs. Aunika Webster-Lake (Mrs. Lake) was appointed to the office of Labour Commissioner. At the time of her appointment she had been a public servant for approximately 12 years. Mrs. Lake has pleaded that part of her duties as Labour Commissioner entailed the supervision of a complement of 9 staff members. One of those persons was an employee by the name of Mrs. Angelique Richardson-Polanco (Mrs. Polanco), who served as a Labour Officer within the Department. It is apparent from the evidence that Mrs. Polanco had been facing a number of personal struggles which may have affected her mental health. In turn, those challenges are alleged to have affected her behaviour at work.
Mrs. Lake's main complaint in this claim is that Mrs. Polanco's behaviour was such that it created an unsafe and stressful work environment. She claims that despite her pleadings with the relevant authorities to address the situation, this was allowed to continue. Even after Mrs. Polanco was removed from the Department, Mrs. Lake alleges that the authorities failed to put in place adequate security measures to guarantee her safety. She claims therefore that she was forced to resign from her post.
Mrs. Lake pleads that Mrs. Polanco's behaviour began sometime in early 2014. She states that many of the incidents were not initially documented. This was because Mrs. Lake made efforts to verbally address the matters. However, she states that when the situation became more particularly egregious, a note was placed on Mrs. Polanco's file. Some of the complaints were summarized as follows:
-
(a) 10 th February, 2014 – Mrs. Polanco contacted the Ministry and directed that a particular work permit application, belonging to her then boyfriend, be approved immediately and in priority to the other work permits. It is asserted that Mrs. Polanco wrongfully stated that this directive came from the claimant as Labour Commissioner. Mrs. Lake stated in her witness statement that after confronting Mrs. Polanco about the incident, she indicated that she depended on her boyfriend to help pay her bills and therefore she needed his work permit to be granted. It is Mrs. Lake's evidence that although no note was placed on Mrs. Polanco's file, the incident was reported to her supervisor. There is however no documented record of this report.
-
(b) 14 th May, 2014 — inappropriate conduct of and indecent language by Mrs. Polanco in the presence of customers.
-
(c) 20 th May, 2014 – Mrs. Polanco was talking on her mobile phone while customers waited. She refused to end the mobile call and attend to customers even after a request was made by Mrs. Lake.
-
(d) 23 rd May, 2014 – Mrs. Polanco was again warned about the use of her cell phone in the front office; especially in the presence of customers.
-
(e) 11 th March, 2015 – Mrs. Polanco refused to do the work assigned to her and was disrespectful to Mrs. Lake. It is alleged here that the Permanent Secretary intervened and was able to assist with this situation.
-
(f) 17 th June, 2016 – Mrs. Polanco's unauthorized and early exit from the office without informing any staff member of her leaving. Her station was unmanned at the time and no other officer was in the front office.
-
(g) September 2016 – A customer complained that Mrs. Polanco broke down a gate and door. Mrs. Polanco admitted to breaking down the customer's gate and sought to justify her actions.
-
(h) 15 th March, 2017 – Mrs. Polanco's breach of confidentiality to an employer whose employee had made a complaint against the said employer.
I note that these complaints relate primarily to Mrs. Polanco's performance on the job. Mrs. Lake however goes on to state that Mrs. Polanco also engaged in threats of violence towards her and members of staff. According to the pleadings, Mrs. Polanco is said to have threatened to shoot members of staff, as well as Mrs. Lake. She threatened to light a match in the gas station nearby as well as bombing the Department. Mrs. Polanco is said to have threatened to kill the father of her children, as well as the children themselves. She threatened self-harm and also made violent remarks towards the Social Services Department. Mrs. Lake states in her evidence that Mrs. Polanco would roam the office whilst speaking to herself. She would rant about her personal issues and even cut herself at times. All of these incidents were not noted in writing. Mrs. Lake's assertion was that she did not view these as grounds for discipline. However, it is alleged that each incident was reported via telephone to the Permanent Secretary and to the Department of Public Administration.
Mrs. Lake recalled an incident which occurred on 5 th November, 2014. She alleges that on that day Mrs. Polanco reported for work some time after 8:00a.m. She however threatened to blow up the office. Mrs. Lake did not personally hear the threat but stated that it was reported to her by another Labour Officer, Ms. Collyanna Ritchie-Brookes. It was alleged that Ms. Ritchie-Brookes reported that Mrs. Polanco stated in the presence of herself, Danette Webster and Carmencita Davis, Deputy Labour Commissioner, that she would blow up the Labour Department by putting a bomb in the office with a timer and walking out before it explodes or placing a bomb by the nearby gas station.
Mrs. Lake states that upon receiving the report of those threats she immediately summoned Mrs. Polanco to a private meeting in her office. At that meeting, Mrs. Lake enquired of Mrs. Polanco's state of mind. She asked her about how she was feeling that day and how her children were. Mrs. Polanco responded by stating that her children were okay. Mrs. Polanco also informed Mrs. Lake that she was sick of everything. She stated that if she had a bomb, she would blow the office up. She said that in her head she planned to build a bomb, plant it in the office, walk away and just let it blow up. She also stated that if she had a gun, she would kill her children, her husband and herself. She started crying and began to shake.
Upon Mrs. Lake's request, the Permanent Secretary attended the office at that time and assisted in calming Mrs. Polanco down. After the conversation Mrs. Lake asked for assistance but was informed that this was a matter which had to be dealt with by the Public Administration Department. Attempts were made to contact that department and Mrs. Polanco was allowed to return to her home for the remainder of the day. Attempts at encouraging Mrs. Polanco to participate in counselling did not bear consistent fruit. I note however that in cross-examination before this court Ms. Richie-Brookes did not recall ever making such a report to Mrs. Lake. She denies the assertions that Mrs. Polanco's behaviour was as egregious as is painted by Mrs. Lake. It is important to also note that no contemporaneous note or statement of this incident was recorded by Mrs. Lake. There is also no evidence of a formal report having been made to the Department of Public Administration regarding this incident.
Despite the lack of any formal report being made, Mrs. Lake states that she made constant reports of those incidents to the Public Administration Department. It is alleged that this department has charge over the Public Service, under the direction of the Deputy Governor and deals with all human resource management issues. In her witness statement she claims that she made a report of each incident to her supervisor, the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs, who was Ms. Aurjul Wilson at the time. Ms. Wilson gave evidence before the court. She acknowledged that there was a concern with Mrs. Polanco and spoke of an incident which she witnessed and in which she was able to help calm Mrs. Polanco down. She did indicate that the issue was bigger than Mrs. Lake and needed to be dealt with by Public Administration. However, it is unclear to me as to precisely what “issue” she was referring to. She witnessed Mrs. Polanco shaking and it appears to me that both Mrs. Lake and Ms. Wilson sought to address this problem from the perspective of providing some professional help to Mrs. Polanco.
Mrs. Lake goes on in her evidence to present further examples of the need for her intervention as a result of Mrs. Polanco's behaviour. She speaks of an incident on 16 th March, 2016 in which she accompanied Mrs. Polanco to the hospital due to the manner in which she was behaving. She was again threatening violence on account of the domestic issues she was confronting at the time. Mrs. Lake states that she informed the Permanent Secretary, as well as Mrs. Polanco's case worker at the Social Services Department. Again, I must state that there was no evidence that a formal report of this...
To continue reading
Request your trial