Unpaid Airzim workers seize assets

By Takunda Maodza and Abigail Mawonde

AIR Zimbabwe’s woes were compounded yesterday when workers that are owed nearly US$400 000 in unpaid salaries and bonuses attached property that includes management vehicles.

Efforts to stop the attachment and subsequent auctioning of the assets failed at the High Court. The properties, attached by the deputy sheriff last Friday, can now be auctioned anytime despite protests by Airzim that this will paralyse its already stymied operations.

Pilots are on strike and the airline has for the past two weeks been transferring passengers to other carriers. Airzim is incurring a monthly loss of US$3,5 million and all its craft on all routes – when operating – are incurring losses.

Attached were a Toyota minibus, a 75-seater bus, a Mercedes Benz ML270, four Mercedes Benz kompressors, two Mazda Eagles and three Mazda 323s. Also seized were three Mazda B1800 pick-up trucks, two Mazda 626s, an Opel Astra, a Nissan Sunny and a Madza 3.

The deputy sheriff also attached six other vehicles and 100 computer sets among other things. Ten lathe machines and five milling machines are to be sold to recover the US$378 191,15 owed to employees. The figure increases to US$427 412,53 when such costs as services fees and commission are added.

Some of the properties were attached in November last year, but had not been auctioned because of legal challenges. High Court judge, Justice Andrew Mutema, dismissed with costs an urgent chamber application for stay of execution by Airzim lawyer Mr Selby Hwacha.

Justice Mutema said the High Court had no jurisdiction on the matter.

“The door is now shut on Air Zimbabwe. The deputy sheri-ff has already removed things and they are going to be sold,” said Mr Caleb Mucheche of Matsikidze and Mucheche, who represented the disgruntled workers.

In his application, Mr Hwacha said the airline’s operations “will be irreparably affected if execution is allowed to proceed”. He said the national airline was an important and strategic State institution.

“The attachment and or notice to remove and sell applicants’ property is so manifestly unlawful that an inference of improper conduct is sustainable,” Mr Hwacha had argued. He also challenged the impartiality of Mr Arthur Manase, the arbitrator in the case between Airzim and its workers.

“On November 18, 2010 following a similar application, this honourable court issued as an order by consent directing that the first respondent Mr Arthur Manase, who had dealt with the matter before, be directed again to determine whether or not the date due to the second (Air Transport Union) and third (National Air Workers Union) for salary and bonus November and December 2009 had been discharged.

“It is worthy of mention that the matter has had a troubled background…There are serious issues as to whether or not Mr Manase has acted impartially in this matter.”