Letter To Van Boxmeer, Executive Chairman of Heineken International
JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH LLM (Lond.)
BARRISTER-AT-LAW
1ST Law Tel: 00-233-21-253751
#28/1 Castle Rd., Adabraka 00-233-20-8157566
P. O. Box GP115 00-233-24-4293270
Accra E-mail: joe_debrah@yahoo.co.uk
October 5, 2005
Mr. Jean-Francois van Boxmeer
Chairman
Executive Board
Heineken International
Amsterdam.
Dear Mr. van Boxmeer,
TREATMENT OF MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL OF GHANA BREWERIES LIMITED (GBL) FOLLOWING ACQUISITION BY GUINNESS GHANA BREWERIES LIMITED (GGBL) –OPEN LETTER TO HEINEKEN
I take the opportunity to draw your attention to certain events that have occurred in your former OpCo in Ghana, GBL, following Heineken’s sale of its interests to Diageo Plc’s subsidiary in Ghana, GGBL in 2004.
I do so fully cognizant of your new role as the Chairman of the Executive Board of Heineken International. I wish to extend my congratulations. I have elected to write to you and make same available to all the relevant people involved in this matter primarily due to the fact that you have a personal responsibility to ensure that justice is done to all the personnel of GBL in the wake of the takeover. This communication is also premised on the fact that I had a personal encounter with you during my tenure as Company Secretary/Legal Adviser of GBL. You will recall your trip to Ghana to assure all the employees of GBL that the capital restructuring project that GBL was undertaking would resolved all the long-term problems of the Company and assure growth and profitability. This letter is therefore informed in part by the statements that you personally made to us in Ghana juxtaposed with the events that unfolded soon thereafter culminating in the takeover by GGBL.
I have elected also to forward a copy of this communication to the former/present members of the Board of GBL and Mr. Nick Blazquez, Africa Director of Diageo Plc. Let the records show therefore that everyone listed on this communication is privy to all the facts and has elected not to do the right thing by myself and my other management colleagues who have served GBL and Heineken so diligently in their careers but have been abandoned to their fate in the wake of the divestment of Heineken’s interests in GBL.
I wish to take the opportunity to inform you that the National Labour Commission per the attached letter dated October 3, 2005, ruled that my terminal benefits must be paid latest by 0ctober 17, 2005. Critically, it held that my terminal benefits “must be informed by the said agreement of June 9, 2005 which includes gratuity payments to the petitioner”.
Until June 30, 2005, I was the Company Secretary/Legal Adviser of GBL. Further to the divestment of the Heineken stake in GBL, my position was declared redundant. Consequently, together with 9other management personnel, we negotiated an exit package which was duly set down and executed on June 9, 2005. The new management of GBL deliberately chose to interprete the said agreement to the detriment of myself and my management colleagues by deying me the agreed gratuity payments and also miscalculating our pension entitlements. More importantly, someone within the organization decided not to disclose the fact that the yield on our pensions for April, May and June were outstanding. This was never disclosed as part of the package and only acknowledged after the management had been challenged. As a fully qualified Ghanaian barrister, I have been at a loss why two major multinationals, Diageo Plc and Heineken International, would behave in such a manner to infringe the rights of workers when they know they cannot do any of those things in Europe. Is it because in Africa there are no laws to guide corporate actions? I was therefore compelled to file a petition before the legally mandated body in Ghana for the purpose, the National Labour Commission in July 2005. I also decided to hold my official car as a lien against the payment of my entitlements. Most of my colleagues, knowing fully well that their entitlements have been deliberately miscalculated, decided on a safety first approach by taking the offer and suing later for their money. As a lawyer, I could not accept a situation where my employer is fully aware of mistakes and yet openly dares everyone and say, you can decide to go to court if you wish. I could therefore not take any money purporting to be in full settlement of my terminal benefits when in fact it was not. I have therefore not been paid one dime since I exited GBL on June 30, 2005. Having sat in the Boardroom for 4 years and having played a major role in the successful completion of the acquisition process, I am baffled that anyone would elect to treat me this way. Project Marina was marketed to our people as a merger, knowing fully well that this was an acquisition so that the ground would be smoothened for the takeover. The records would clearly show that oat approximately 11 p.m. on June 30, 2005, I was handed a letter signed by Mr. Devlin Hainsworth purporting to detail my entitlements. The said letter was not on a corporate letterhead and contained lots of errors. On July 2, 2005, I wrote to GBL pointing out the errors. About a month later, I received an undated letter which stated inter alia, that I was not entitled to gratuity payments. Strangely, GBL’s answer to my petition attached a letter dated July 4, 2005 also detailing a different amount as my benefits. Characteristically and quite unworthy of a corporate entity of the caliber of Guinness, Mr. Devlin Hainsworth did not sign that letter. The official copy of what the business offered as my terminal benefits was unsigned! I have also till date not received a copy of that letter except the copy I received from the NLC which was the first time I even knew of the existence of another letter on my benefits.
As the custodian of GBL rules and regulations, I would not waste my energies if I was not so entitled under law. I have consequently tried to draw the attention of Mr. Tom de Man who incidentally is a member of the GBL Board and also the GGBL Board and whom I have personally served as Board Secretary to the issues. Till date, none of my communication has ever been acknowledged though I know as a fact that they were received. With all due respect, Sir, I therefore do not expect any response to this. I am too insignificant to Heineken after the disposal of its stake to interest anyone out there. But the records will show that you are fully ware of the facts of this matter. The records will show that Mr. de Man is ware of this. The records will definitely show that the Board of GBL, both pre-acquisition and post-acquisition is fully aware of the facts. Let none therefore plead ignorance. As indicated in an earlier communication to Mr. de Man, the motive underlying a decision for the new owners of GBL to antagonize senior Ghanaian professionals in the land of their birth after such dedicated service, defies my understanding. As always, the so-called advisors, who are laughing all the way to the bank, are the only beneficiaries. He principle of "pacta sunt servanda” means that when an agreement is executed, one is obligated to abide by it. The events of the night of June 30, 2005, when senior managers were hounded out of the business and told to their face to go to court if they wished is the lowest point any entity would sink to. Managers who had dedicated their lives to the business did not even have a handshake as acknowledgement of their role. Rather they were treated worse than criminals. There is therefore a groundswell of ill-will engendered. The mindset of the new owners of the business would definitely cost the business in the long run. What happened to the senior managers could never happen in a place like Nigeria. They would never take such treatment. However the perception that Ghanaians are docile and therefore the Miten Dutias of this world would be brought down from London solely to make savings on the provisions for the redundancy exercise without recourse to their rights would have to be discarded. As a lawyer, living in the land of my birth, with inalienable rights under the Ghanaian Constitution, I am sure you would agree that I would defend my interests. Workers have been offered lower jobs and told to either take them or leave, in contravention of Ghanaian law. The fact that an avalanche of issues has not emanated does not mean that senior personnel like your good self should not be concerned about what’s going on in Ghana and the potential it has to soil the good corporate image of Heineken.
With the ruling of the National Labour Commission, I wish to restate my entitlements as follows, pursuant to the June 9, 2005 agreement:
a. 2 months salary in lieu of notice being ¢15,880,906.63 x 2 = ¢31,761,813.26
b. Full pension payments being ¢40,555,415.81 (contribution) + ¢65,366,056.21 (employer contribution) + ¢78,585,690.95 (yield as at March, 2005) = ¢189,507,163
c. Yield for April, May and June 2005 = to be disclosed and paid
d. Full gratuity @ 12% of annual basic salary being ¢22,868,505.55 x 3.8 = ¢86,900,321.08
e. Outstanding Leave = ¢18,046,485
f. Repatriation Cost = ¢5,000,000
g. 3 months salary for each year served being ¢15,880,906.63 x 3 x 3.8 = ¢181,042,335.6
h. Total = ¢512,258,117.9 + outstanding yield for April-June 2005
Less
i. Total debt to company = ¢177,727,250
j. Net benefit = ¢334,530,867.9 + yield for April-June 2005
It is my expectation that my terminal benefits would be paid fully by Monday October 17, 2005 as directed by the Labour Commission.
Respectfully, Sir, everyone who is privy to this communication cannot allege ignorance. Having rendered dedicated service, the least anyone can do is also to do the right thing by paying what is legitimately due to us under law in Ghana. In the mean time, I shall continue to fight to assure justice for myself and for my colleagues. Indeed, we are establishing a not-for-profit solely dedicated to preventing such hardships befalling our citizens in the land of their birth. We shall employ all legal means necessary to ensure that our rights are not trampled upon in the land where our umbilical cords are buried. I have been to Holland and also lived in the United Kingdom. You have no qualms out there that you are a stranger and you ought to abide by the law. As a lawyer, I wonder why certain personnel posted to Africa believe that the laws have been made for only locals and that they and the entities they run are above the law.
In the light of the foregoing, in the event that my entitlements remain unpaid even after the National Labour Commission’s ruling, I reserve the right to do what is legitimately possible to assure my rights under Ghanaian law.
“If you didn’t know, now you know!” – Reggie Rockstone, a local hiplife artiste.
Yours sincerely,
JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH Esq.
Cc:
1. Mr. Nick Blazquez 2. GBL Board Members
2. Former GBL Board members
3. Hon. Yaw Osafo-Maafo, MP, Akim Oda
BARRISTER-AT-LAW
1ST Law Tel: 00-233-21-253751
#28/1 Castle Rd., Adabraka 00-233-20-8157566
P. O. Box GP115 00-233-24-4293270
Accra E-mail: joe_debrah@yahoo.co.uk
October 5, 2005
Mr. Jean-Francois van Boxmeer
Chairman
Executive Board
Heineken International
Amsterdam.
Dear Mr. van Boxmeer,
TREATMENT OF MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL OF GHANA BREWERIES LIMITED (GBL) FOLLOWING ACQUISITION BY GUINNESS GHANA BREWERIES LIMITED (GGBL) –OPEN LETTER TO HEINEKEN
I take the opportunity to draw your attention to certain events that have occurred in your former OpCo in Ghana, GBL, following Heineken’s sale of its interests to Diageo Plc’s subsidiary in Ghana, GGBL in 2004.
I do so fully cognizant of your new role as the Chairman of the Executive Board of Heineken International. I wish to extend my congratulations. I have elected to write to you and make same available to all the relevant people involved in this matter primarily due to the fact that you have a personal responsibility to ensure that justice is done to all the personnel of GBL in the wake of the takeover. This communication is also premised on the fact that I had a personal encounter with you during my tenure as Company Secretary/Legal Adviser of GBL. You will recall your trip to Ghana to assure all the employees of GBL that the capital restructuring project that GBL was undertaking would resolved all the long-term problems of the Company and assure growth and profitability. This letter is therefore informed in part by the statements that you personally made to us in Ghana juxtaposed with the events that unfolded soon thereafter culminating in the takeover by GGBL.
I have elected also to forward a copy of this communication to the former/present members of the Board of GBL and Mr. Nick Blazquez, Africa Director of Diageo Plc. Let the records show therefore that everyone listed on this communication is privy to all the facts and has elected not to do the right thing by myself and my other management colleagues who have served GBL and Heineken so diligently in their careers but have been abandoned to their fate in the wake of the divestment of Heineken’s interests in GBL.
I wish to take the opportunity to inform you that the National Labour Commission per the attached letter dated October 3, 2005, ruled that my terminal benefits must be paid latest by 0ctober 17, 2005. Critically, it held that my terminal benefits “must be informed by the said agreement of June 9, 2005 which includes gratuity payments to the petitioner”.
Until June 30, 2005, I was the Company Secretary/Legal Adviser of GBL. Further to the divestment of the Heineken stake in GBL, my position was declared redundant. Consequently, together with 9other management personnel, we negotiated an exit package which was duly set down and executed on June 9, 2005. The new management of GBL deliberately chose to interprete the said agreement to the detriment of myself and my management colleagues by deying me the agreed gratuity payments and also miscalculating our pension entitlements. More importantly, someone within the organization decided not to disclose the fact that the yield on our pensions for April, May and June were outstanding. This was never disclosed as part of the package and only acknowledged after the management had been challenged. As a fully qualified Ghanaian barrister, I have been at a loss why two major multinationals, Diageo Plc and Heineken International, would behave in such a manner to infringe the rights of workers when they know they cannot do any of those things in Europe. Is it because in Africa there are no laws to guide corporate actions? I was therefore compelled to file a petition before the legally mandated body in Ghana for the purpose, the National Labour Commission in July 2005. I also decided to hold my official car as a lien against the payment of my entitlements. Most of my colleagues, knowing fully well that their entitlements have been deliberately miscalculated, decided on a safety first approach by taking the offer and suing later for their money. As a lawyer, I could not accept a situation where my employer is fully aware of mistakes and yet openly dares everyone and say, you can decide to go to court if you wish. I could therefore not take any money purporting to be in full settlement of my terminal benefits when in fact it was not. I have therefore not been paid one dime since I exited GBL on June 30, 2005. Having sat in the Boardroom for 4 years and having played a major role in the successful completion of the acquisition process, I am baffled that anyone would elect to treat me this way. Project Marina was marketed to our people as a merger, knowing fully well that this was an acquisition so that the ground would be smoothened for the takeover. The records would clearly show that oat approximately 11 p.m. on June 30, 2005, I was handed a letter signed by Mr. Devlin Hainsworth purporting to detail my entitlements. The said letter was not on a corporate letterhead and contained lots of errors. On July 2, 2005, I wrote to GBL pointing out the errors. About a month later, I received an undated letter which stated inter alia, that I was not entitled to gratuity payments. Strangely, GBL’s answer to my petition attached a letter dated July 4, 2005 also detailing a different amount as my benefits. Characteristically and quite unworthy of a corporate entity of the caliber of Guinness, Mr. Devlin Hainsworth did not sign that letter. The official copy of what the business offered as my terminal benefits was unsigned! I have also till date not received a copy of that letter except the copy I received from the NLC which was the first time I even knew of the existence of another letter on my benefits.
As the custodian of GBL rules and regulations, I would not waste my energies if I was not so entitled under law. I have consequently tried to draw the attention of Mr. Tom de Man who incidentally is a member of the GBL Board and also the GGBL Board and whom I have personally served as Board Secretary to the issues. Till date, none of my communication has ever been acknowledged though I know as a fact that they were received. With all due respect, Sir, I therefore do not expect any response to this. I am too insignificant to Heineken after the disposal of its stake to interest anyone out there. But the records will show that you are fully ware of the facts of this matter. The records will show that Mr. de Man is ware of this. The records will definitely show that the Board of GBL, both pre-acquisition and post-acquisition is fully aware of the facts. Let none therefore plead ignorance. As indicated in an earlier communication to Mr. de Man, the motive underlying a decision for the new owners of GBL to antagonize senior Ghanaian professionals in the land of their birth after such dedicated service, defies my understanding. As always, the so-called advisors, who are laughing all the way to the bank, are the only beneficiaries. He principle of "pacta sunt servanda” means that when an agreement is executed, one is obligated to abide by it. The events of the night of June 30, 2005, when senior managers were hounded out of the business and told to their face to go to court if they wished is the lowest point any entity would sink to. Managers who had dedicated their lives to the business did not even have a handshake as acknowledgement of their role. Rather they were treated worse than criminals. There is therefore a groundswell of ill-will engendered. The mindset of the new owners of the business would definitely cost the business in the long run. What happened to the senior managers could never happen in a place like Nigeria. They would never take such treatment. However the perception that Ghanaians are docile and therefore the Miten Dutias of this world would be brought down from London solely to make savings on the provisions for the redundancy exercise without recourse to their rights would have to be discarded. As a lawyer, living in the land of my birth, with inalienable rights under the Ghanaian Constitution, I am sure you would agree that I would defend my interests. Workers have been offered lower jobs and told to either take them or leave, in contravention of Ghanaian law. The fact that an avalanche of issues has not emanated does not mean that senior personnel like your good self should not be concerned about what’s going on in Ghana and the potential it has to soil the good corporate image of Heineken.
With the ruling of the National Labour Commission, I wish to restate my entitlements as follows, pursuant to the June 9, 2005 agreement:
a. 2 months salary in lieu of notice being ¢15,880,906.63 x 2 = ¢31,761,813.26
b. Full pension payments being ¢40,555,415.81 (contribution) + ¢65,366,056.21 (employer contribution) + ¢78,585,690.95 (yield as at March, 2005) = ¢189,507,163
c. Yield for April, May and June 2005 = to be disclosed and paid
d. Full gratuity @ 12% of annual basic salary being ¢22,868,505.55 x 3.8 = ¢86,900,321.08
e. Outstanding Leave = ¢18,046,485
f. Repatriation Cost = ¢5,000,000
g. 3 months salary for each year served being ¢15,880,906.63 x 3 x 3.8 = ¢181,042,335.6
h. Total = ¢512,258,117.9 + outstanding yield for April-June 2005
Less
i. Total debt to company = ¢177,727,250
j. Net benefit = ¢334,530,867.9 + yield for April-June 2005
It is my expectation that my terminal benefits would be paid fully by Monday October 17, 2005 as directed by the Labour Commission.
Respectfully, Sir, everyone who is privy to this communication cannot allege ignorance. Having rendered dedicated service, the least anyone can do is also to do the right thing by paying what is legitimately due to us under law in Ghana. In the mean time, I shall continue to fight to assure justice for myself and for my colleagues. Indeed, we are establishing a not-for-profit solely dedicated to preventing such hardships befalling our citizens in the land of their birth. We shall employ all legal means necessary to ensure that our rights are not trampled upon in the land where our umbilical cords are buried. I have been to Holland and also lived in the United Kingdom. You have no qualms out there that you are a stranger and you ought to abide by the law. As a lawyer, I wonder why certain personnel posted to Africa believe that the laws have been made for only locals and that they and the entities they run are above the law.
In the light of the foregoing, in the event that my entitlements remain unpaid even after the National Labour Commission’s ruling, I reserve the right to do what is legitimately possible to assure my rights under Ghanaian law.
“If you didn’t know, now you know!” – Reggie Rockstone, a local hiplife artiste.
Yours sincerely,
JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH Esq.
Cc:
1. Mr. Nick Blazquez 2. GBL Board Members
2. Former GBL Board members
3. Hon. Yaw Osafo-Maafo, MP, Akim Oda
posted by JOEDEE at 11:12 AM
1 Comments:
heinekin are advertising on neopets.com, the largest childrens gaming site online. attempts to contact them and the site about this improper and unlawful advertising continue to be unsuccessful.
Post a Comment
<< Home