— Kofi Yeboah Uses As A Scapegoat
According to them, a prolific writer and multiple awards winning journalist, Kofi Yeboah, a Staff Writer at the Daily Graphic, the flagship newspaper of the GCGL is being used as scapegoat.
Mr Yeboah who is the first to face the MD’s tyrannical system of management at the GCGL had no option than to tender in his resignation letter to the management, which was gladly accepted.
The senior journalist’s is due to pack bag and baggage from the GCGL on 10th February, 2015.
Investigations conducted into the resignation of Mr. Yeboah revealed that the young talented and versatile journalist was haunted to resign because of an opinion article he wrote, entitled ‘Celebrating 10 years at Graphic – Notes from my scribbling pad’, which was published in the May 5th 2014 edition of the Daily Graphic.
The opinion article, which gauges the general deteriorating morale of many workers of the company and seemingly political interference, however, did not go down well with management of the company.
Subsequently, fact-finding and disciplinary committees were set up by management of the GCGL on May 6th 2014, to investigate the circumstances under which the opinion article, written by Kofi Yeboah was published in the Daily Graphic.
The fact-finding committee, chaired by Mrs. Mavis Kitcher, was tasked to find out how the systems at Graphic failed, leading to the publication of the said article and the ramifications on the brand’s reputation.
The four-member committee interviewed eight editorial gatekeepers, including the editor of the Graphic and found out: “The Features editor, night editor and deputy editor glossed over their gatekeeping responsibilities. There is evidence that the article passed through virtually all the processes required”.
The committee added: “The problem, however, was that each person thought the other had read it so no one on the Night Desk finally read the full article. All those in the gatekeeping chain failed to exercise good judgement in passing the article for publication unedited”.
Amazingly, the 16-points of the findings and recommendations of the committee found nothing wrong with the opinion article, but the management accused him of negligence of duty.
Predetermined Action Against Staff
In a letter dated 9th December, 2014 and entitled “Re-final Written Warning”, Mr Yeboah did not mince words than to say that there was no basis for the misconduct, negligence and other charges leveled, and sanction applied against him by the Graphic management. For that reason, he had no option that to object to them.
Also, the versatile journalist restated that; “the processes of the fact-finding and disciplinary committees were not undertaken in good faith and in accordance with the principles of natural justice. That being the case, the setting up of the two committees appears to be a mere façade to execute a predetermined action against me cannot derogate from the provisions of Articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution”.
Referring to a letter dated 12th November, 2014 and signed by the Acting Director of the Human Resources at the GCGL, Justice M. Sarpong, the haunted staff writer of the company said: “You quoted Section 22 (b) of the Collective Agreement as the basis for the management decision conveyed in your ‘Final Written Warning’ letter. But with all due respect, Section 22 (b) of the Collective Agreement is not independent of Section 22 (a) which spells out offences that warrant summary dismissal”.
So, the management of the GCGL Mr Yeboah noted could not apply Section 22 (b) without recourse to Section 22 (a). He put it to the management they did not make any particular reference to the findings and recommendations of the fact-finding and disciplinary committees set up by them that warrant the application of Section 22 (a) even before resorting to Section 22 (b) as a lesser sanction.
It, therefore, appears to the senior journalist that the charges levelled, and the sanction applied against him, were not guided by the findings and recommendations of the two committees.
“With all due respect, your explanation of the mandates of the fact-finding and disciplinary committees is not germane to this issue”, Mr Yeboah argued.
Constitution
Graphic as a foremost media institution supposed to respect the 1992 Constitution, but recent happenings at the Adabraka based organisation could be described by legal luminaries as the usurpation of the Constitution.
In making reference to Section 22 (b) of the company’s Collective Agreement, the management of the most profitable newspapers group who are now feeling heat because of dwindling sales and others are still boasting of their discretionary powers. But Mr Yeboah reminded them that; “the exercise of management’s discretionary power cannot derogate from the provisions of Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution which is the supreme law of Ghana.
Further, I respectfully wish to direct management’s mind to Article 21 (1) (a), 23, 162 (4) and 163 of the 1992 Constitution”.
Management Acted In Bad Faith
According to the letter, the management of GCGL acted irresponsible in the sense that they failed to give copy of the fact-finding committee to Mr Yeboah to enable him ‘recap’ at the disciplinary committee which was hurriedly set up by right-hand men of Mr Ashigbey.
“Even in a court of law, parties are given transcripts of record of proceedings. Your failure to give me copies of the two reports is an act of bad faith and an affront to natural justice”, the talented senior journalist schooled egoistic Ken.
Mr Yeboah also submitted that even in a court of law, a witness in the dock may not be under any obligation to speak at all, or to speak to issues as the court desires. Then why should the members of the disciplinary committee misconstrued his refusal to recap as a show of disrespect? He questioned.
The staff writer who has been haunted to resign noted: “The fact-finding was set up on 6th May, 2014, at a time I was on leave, but I was not informed about it (although my contact address was available) until I resumed on Wednesday May 21, 2014. Certainly, that was an act of bad faith and disrespect towards me.”
He continued: “On the very day I resumed from leave, I was summoned to appear before the fact-finding committee within minutes of my arrival in the office, even without prior notice. That was an act of bad faith and disrespect towards me. My willingness to appear before the committee under that unusual circumstance was rather an act of good faith, submissiveness and respect to the committee”.
Graphic Gives 17 Minutes Prior Notice To Staff
Furthermore, when Mr Yeboah appeared before the fact-finding committee, he protested against his summoning without prior notice and requested for a letter from the committee to enable him have a fair idea about its mandate.
After quite a lengthy argument over the issue, the committee he said granted his request. A letter was delivered to him at 11:13am that same morning, asking Mr Yeboah to appear before the committee at 11:30am, meaning he was given only 17 minutes prior notice. Nonetheless, he promptly obliged to the summons in good faith and out of respect for the committee.
Again, the fact-finding committee set up by management which was constituted by only management staff, including the Training Manager (now Acting Director of Human Resource & Administration, Justice M. Sarpong who signed the “Final Written Warning” could not be said to be an act of good faith, Mr Yeboah said.
Additionally, he was emphatic: “I do not know when the disciplinary committee was set up but the chairperson, Peace Gadogbe, called me on telephone sometime in August 2014, around 3pm, asking me to appear before a committee at 9am the following day.
I protested for 30 minutes before she agreed to reschedule the meeting to a day after the original day she had earlier indicated. That was an act of bad faith and disrespect towards me. The chairperson did not initially tell me it was a disciplinary committee. I had insisted on a letter and it was only when the letter was delivered to me that I realised the committee was a disciplinary committee. That was an act of bad faith.”
Defence
The letter sighted by this reporter inviting Mr Yeboah to appear before the disciplinary committee stated, inter alia: “Further to your appearance before the fact-finding committee, management has set up a disciplinary committee to seek further clarification on your article…..You are invited to substantiate claims made in that article”.
But in his humble view, the language of that suggests that the disciplinary committee was not independent of the fact-finding committee. Mr Yeboah further argued: “Since the disciplinary committee relied on the proceedings of the fact-finding committee, I could also rely on my submissions at the fact-finding committee as a defence, much so when I had adequately addressed the issues the disciplinary committee was seeking to clarity and I had nothing more to add”.
African Eye News.com