Ex dairy workers sue lawyer
Apr 26, 2010
FORMER employees of the defunct Dairy Corporation have petitioned the Law Council to intervene in a dispute that ensured over payments with their lawyer, Augustine Semakula.
By Barbara Among
FORMER employees of the defunct Dairy Corporation have petitioned the Law Council to intervene in a dispute that ensured over payments with their lawyer, Augustine Semakula.
In a letter of May 7, 2009, the former workers complained that Semakula wrongly computed their benefits using a lower percentage.
They also said Semakula charged them twice for fees.
The former employees indicated that as per the three different consent decrees, they were supposed to be paid 25% interest, but Ssemakula only paid them 4%.
They also complained that Ssemakula deducted lawyer’s fees of 30%, more than he should have.
The group, comprising over 200 former workers, asked the council to force Ssemakula to pay the amount due to them.
“We were supposed to earn 25% interest on our terminal benefits and milk allowances as per consent, Semakula and Company Advocates used 4% to calculate the fees instead of 25%,†said the workers.
“The lawyer’s fees of 30% were also deducted twice,†the letter to the council read.
“The purpose of writing this letter, is therefore, to ask you to address this compliant with Semakula and Company Advocates so that proper computation of our terminal benefits is done and we are given our balance due,†the letter read.
Ssemakula represented the former workers in a case in which they were awarded sh10b by their former employer.
The workers, in September 2002, sued the Dairy Corporation and the Attorney General for their unpaid terminal benefits.
They had also sued on the basis that the Privatisation Unit had misinterpreted the provisions of the retrenchment package by relying on the advice of the Attorney General.
The workers added that the unit had also miscalculated and paid them inadequate terminal benefits.
Efforts to get Semakula’s response were futile as he cancelled appointments with him and instead sent a spokesperson who declined to be quoted on the issues.
The spokesperson, however, revealed that close to seven of the cheques issued by Semakula for the workers bounced. He also said not all the former workers got their money and those who got, were paid less.
“This happened because Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) blocked the account due to dispute of taxation of terminal benefits,†the spokesperson said.
URA argued that Privatisation Unit paid the sh10b court award to the claimants’ lawyer without deducting taxes.
FORMER employees of the defunct Dairy Corporation have petitioned the Law Council to intervene in a dispute that ensured over payments with their lawyer, Augustine Semakula.
In a letter of May 7, 2009, the former workers complained that Semakula wrongly computed their benefits using a lower percentage.
They also said Semakula charged them twice for fees.
The former employees indicated that as per the three different consent decrees, they were supposed to be paid 25% interest, but Ssemakula only paid them 4%.
They also complained that Ssemakula deducted lawyer’s fees of 30%, more than he should have.
The group, comprising over 200 former workers, asked the council to force Ssemakula to pay the amount due to them.
“We were supposed to earn 25% interest on our terminal benefits and milk allowances as per consent, Semakula and Company Advocates used 4% to calculate the fees instead of 25%,†said the workers.
“The lawyer’s fees of 30% were also deducted twice,†the letter to the council read.
“The purpose of writing this letter, is therefore, to ask you to address this compliant with Semakula and Company Advocates so that proper computation of our terminal benefits is done and we are given our balance due,†the letter read.
Ssemakula represented the former workers in a case in which they were awarded sh10b by their former employer.
The workers, in September 2002, sued the Dairy Corporation and the Attorney General for their unpaid terminal benefits.
They had also sued on the basis that the Privatisation Unit had misinterpreted the provisions of the retrenchment package by relying on the advice of the Attorney General.
The workers added that the unit had also miscalculated and paid them inadequate terminal benefits.
Efforts to get Semakula’s response were futile as he cancelled appointments with him and instead sent a spokesperson who declined to be quoted on the issues.
The spokesperson, however, revealed that close to seven of the cheques issued by Semakula for the workers bounced. He also said not all the former workers got their money and those who got, were paid less.
“This happened because Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) blocked the account due to dispute of taxation of terminal benefits,†the spokesperson said.
URA argued that Privatisation Unit paid the sh10b court award to the claimants’ lawyer without deducting taxes.