By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Industrial Tribunal has found “no compelling evidence” to support an Atlantis table gaming supervisor’s claims she was bullied by a casino “coven” during her probationary period.

Sharada Ferguson, its vice-president, ruled that Chrishan Swann’s allegations of “an extremely toxic work culture” at the Paradise Island mega resort’s gaming facility did not stand up in rejecting her wrongful dismissal claim. She found that Atlantis’ actions were justified after it determined she was “not a good fit for the casino division”.

Detailing the background to the dispute, the Industrial Tribunal found Ms Swann signed her employment contract with Paradise Enterprise Ltd, the entity that operates the Atlantis casino, on January 31, 2024. Her employment took effect from February 5, 2024, and she was placed on a three-month probationary period working 40-hour weeks for $173.04 per shift.

“The contract also indicated that the applicant [Ms Swann] could be terminated by the respondent at any time during the three-month probationary period without advance notice or pay in lieu thereof. Additionally, the applicant’s contract stated that upon successful completion of the three-month probationary period, the applicant would be confirmed as a full-time employee,” the Tribunal’s verdict said.

“On April 5, 2024, the applicant met with Glendina Williams, director of human resources for the casino division, who explained that she was terminated for not successfully completing her three-month probationary period. The applicant was also provided with a termination letter dated the same date and she accordingly signed and acknowledged receipt of it.”

However, three days later, on April 8, 2024, Ms Swann “requested that Ms Williams investigate her allegations of bullying and discrimination by certain staffers and managers against her. The applicant was informed by Ms Williams that her matter had been resolved on April 5, 2024, and that her termination stood for the aforementioned reason”.

Dissatisfied with the outcome, Ms Swann filed a trade dispute with the Department of Labour some 17 days later on April 25, 2024. After mediation and conciliation efforts proved fruitless, the minister of labour referred the wrongful dismissal claim to the Industrial Tribunal on July 29, 20-24.

Ms Swann, outlining the basis for her claim, alleged: “I attempted to have human resources investigate my claims against shift manager Sophie Johnson, who fired me for personal reasons, but Miss Glendina told me my case was settled on April 5, 2024. I can prove that a few managers knew I was being bullied on the job but they chose to fire me instead of addressing the issues.

“The reasons were there is an extremely toxic work culture at that casino and the ring leaders of the coven knew I could not fall in line with their system. A few did not feel as if I deserved that amount of dollars and benefits so they decided to fire me before I became a permanent employee.”

Atlantis, though, defended its actions as being in accordance with Ms Swann’s contract which gave the resort the right to terminate her employment at any time during the three-month probationary period without notice or pay in lieu of notice.

At trial, Ms Swann alleged “she experienced difficulties on her job from her initial employment”. She claimed that the Atlantis training manager informed her trainer that Ms Swann’s pay was the same as that they had just received in their salary increase, and this was also told to her co-workers.

“It was further the applicant’s evidence that on Monday, February 12, 2024, she inquired of her pit manager whether she had the liberty to ‘write up’ a dealer who deliberately defied her instructions on a live game. The applicant testified that the dealer ‘did not follow game procedures and made an error that could have earned me a write-up on my first day on the casino floor’,” the Tribunal recorded.

“It was her evidence that the pit manager informed the other employees that ‘I said I came to write them up and I came under a heavy attack from the dealers’. The applicant further testified that some of the dealers went as far as to aggressively approach her about the issue.

“It was her evidence that she wrote a ‘Thank You note’ to bring about a peaceful resolution to the issue but that thereafter her pit manager blatantly and consistently bullied her whilst she worked in her pit. It was the applicant’s evidence that pit managers ‘allowed misfit dealers to show me up in front  of players about issues I was correct on, allowing dealers to correct their own mistakes..’.”

Ms Swann also claimed that a “dealer threatened her twice, without consequence”, and alleged that her shift hours were “manipulated” so that she was placed in the “more demanding sections of the busiest pit”. She also asserted that she decided not to report the incidents, and individuals purportedly involved, for fear this would lead to “more victimisation”.

However, under cross-examination by Atlantis attorneys, Ms Swann agreed that it was the resort’s decision whether to continue employing her once the probationary period expired and that it “had every right contractually to dismiss her, without advance notice or payment, by the third month of her engagement”.

Ms Williams, giving evidence on Atlantis’ behalf, asserted that Ms Swann’s termination was carried out in compliance with Bahamian law and the employment contract’s terms. “Ms Williams clarified that the applicant was terminated on the basis of her not being a good fit for the casino division and thereby her not passing her probationary period,” the Tribunal added.

“The witness also clarified that there was no particular shift manager’s report, ratings or opinion which impacted the respondent’s decision to terminate the applicant during her probationary period. Specifically, the witness clarified that the applicant was not terminated for any misconduct on her part but per clause one of the applicant’s contract of employment.”

Ms Ferguson, for the Tribunal, ruled that there was “no evidence to support the applicant’s claim that she was wrongfully dismissed by the respondent. Quite simply, there was no breach of the applicant’s contract of employment by the respondent.... The Tribunal finds that the applicant was dismissed in accordance with the express terms as stipulated in her contract of employment”.

As for the bullying claims, Ms Ferguson ruled: “For completeness, despite the various aspersions made by the applicant, the Tribunal finds no compelling evidence to support her claim of gross misconduct, namely, discrimination, bullying and/or harassment committed against her by any of the respondent’s employees or managers.

“Specifically, with respect to the applicant’s allegations of discrimination by fellow employees and management, she has not adduced any cogent evidence to support the fact that she experienced discrimination or that she was refused an offer of employment by the respondent for any of the discriminatory grounds delineated under... the Employment Act.”

And, ruling that Atlantis was entitled to dismiss Ms Swann during her probationary period, the Tribunal added: “The Tribunal finds that the respondent could not be faulted for its reliance on the express contractual provision which allowed for the applicant’s termination during her three-month probationary period.

“Also, the applicant, who was not engaged on a fixed-term contract, herself agrees that the respondent was well within its right to dismiss her at any time during her probationary period.”