By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Government’s former labour chief told a terminated worker “there’s no money for you” when she pursued her legal rights to obtain due severance pay from her ex-employer - his sister.

Robert Farquharson, the ex-Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCOU) president who is now head of the Ministry of Labour’s special projects unit, also told Jennifer Rolle to return to work for Abby’s Catering, a business run by Euris Farquharson-Morrison, despite it losing the contract to operate Queen’s College’s Q Cafe.

Details of the phone call between Mr Farquharson and Ms Rolle, which took place in October 2022, were disclosed in a September 1, 2025, Industrial Tribunal verdict which awarded the latter a total $6,360. Besides $4,360 of redundancy pay for the 8.72 years spent with Abby’s Catering, Sharada Ferguson, the Tribunal’s vice-president, ordered that the company pay her an extra $1,500 - or one month’s pay - for “failure to comply with its obligation” to pay her due severance under the Employment Act.

The Tribunal decision disclosed how Ms Rolle pursued her termination pay after “she was left at home with no income or unemployment benefit and outstanding bills” for two months during summer 2022 after Abby’s Catering lost the contract to operate a food catering business from Queen’s College cafe.

After encountering “dire financial struggles, which left her having to borrow money from other people to survive”, and with a child to feed, Ms Rolle sent a What’s App message to Mrs Farquharson-Morrison on October 10, 2022, pointing out that three months had expired since Queen’s College told Abby’s Catering to vacate the Q Cafe by July 8, 2022. As a result, the 12-week temporary lay-off period provided by the Employment Act had expired.

The Tribunal verdict said Mrs Farquharson’s response was to tell Ms Rolle to call Mr Farquharson, her brother, who was the Government’s then-labour director at the Ministry of Labour. Ms Ferguson, in her ‘findings of fact’, ruled that the phone conversation between the latter duo took place and that Ms Rolle called him “reluctantly” and protested that he was not her employer.

“It was her evidence that Mrs Farquharson-Morrison told her to call her brother, Robert Farquharson. The witness said that she questioned Mrs Farquharson-Morrison about why she had to do so. Specifically, the applicant testified that she told Mrs Farquharson-Morrison that she did not understand why she had to call her brother because she did not sign a contract with him,” the Industrial Tribunal verdict disclosed.

“The applicant indicated that she agreed to call Mr Farquharson’s telephone number, which was given to her by Mrs Farquharson-Morrison. The applicant said that she identified herself to Mr Farquharson by name, and that he responded that he knew who she was. 

“The witness said that she was told by Mr Farquharson that ‘no money will be paid out. When I tell you to go to work, you go to work’. The applicant said that her response was ‘Really?’, and that Mr Farquharson responded: ‘Yes.’ The witness testified that she told Mr Farquharson, ‘Okay. No argument’. The applicant said that she told Mr Farquharson that ‘You will speak with my lawyer’, and that he responded, ‘Fine’, and that the telephone call ended.”

Ms Rolle’s version of the phone call was not challenged by Mrs Farquharson-Morrison, or any of the witnesses she called, at the trial. Mr Farquharson was not among those called to give evidence or provide a witness statement before the Industrial Tribunal.

Tribune Business reached out to Mr Farquharson to confirm whether the phone conversation took place, if Ms Rolle’s account was accurate and to obtain his version of events as the Industrial Tribunal’s decision made it appear as if his sister was using him, and his government position, to deter and dissuade the former employee from seeking the severance pay she was entitled to under Bahamian law.

After several unsuccessful attempts to reach him, Mr Farquharson eventually called back just after Tribune Business sent him a detailed text message explaining the nature of its inquiry. After this newspaper pointed him to this text message, he seemed to instantly know the nature of the inquiry, as he quickly replied: “Neil, I have no comment on that sir. Bye, bye.” Mr Farquharson then swiftly terminated the call.

The phone call with Ms Rolle appears to have taken place outside normal Department of Labour processes. A slightly different version of that conversation, detailed later in the Industrial Tribunal verdict, has Mr Farquharson telling her: “There’s no money in the deal. No money in the deal. When I say go to work, you go.”

Mr Farquharson’s position, and advice to Ms Rolle, was not only contradicted by the Industrial Tribunal but also his very own Department of Labour, which Ms Ferguson found had advised her “that she was made redundant by [Abby’s Catering] from the closure of its business at the Q Cafe”.

The Department also advised her she was “able to seek new employment”, and Ms Rolle found a job with the new operator of Queen’s College Q Cafe. The Industrial Tribunal also found that Ms Rolle was unable to obtain unemployment benefit from the National Insurance Board (NIB) because Abby’s Catering and Mrs Farquharson-Morrison were not current with her contributions.

Ms Rolle also testified that, around three days after her conversation with Mr Farquharson, she was visited at the Queen’s College cafeteria by Noel Farquharson, brother of both the former labour chief and Euris Farquharson-Morrison, and a sergeant in the Royal Bahamas Police Force. He handed over a letter informing Ms Rolle that Abby’s Catering had resumed operations and requesting that she return to work for it.

A similar directive, asking Ms Rolle to resume work at Abby’s Catering, was issued on October 25, 2022. However, the Industrial Tribunal branded Sergeant Farquharson’s evidence as “both unhelpful and incredible” as it was impossible for him to have delivered the letter and cheque for two weeks’ pay, plus vacation pay, to her at Queen’s College on July 22, 2022, or July 31, 2022, because she did not start her new job there until August 31, 2022.

Mrs Farquharson-Morrison and Abby’s Catering alleged that Ms Rolle was not due any severance pay because the latter’s failure to return to work as requested meant she had effectively abandoned her employment and walked off the job. However, this was rejected by Ms Ferguson in the Industrial Tribunal’s verdict.

“Based on the facts and evidence of this case, the Tribunal finds that the applicant’s loss of her job at the Q Café amounted to a redundancy. That is, there is no gainsaying that the reason underscoring the applicant’s redundancy was attributable to the economic or financial difficulty experienced by the respondent and its proprietor, Mrs Farquharson- Morrison, which subsequently led to the cessation of its business at the Q Café,” the Industrial Tribunal found.

“Accordingly, the Tribunal also accepts that the work resumption request was only belatedly made upon Mrs Farquharson-Morrison’s realization that although the applicant had obtained full-time employment with the new operator of the Queen’s College cafeteria, she was still expecting to receive severance or redundancy pay from the respondent. That is, the Tribunal accepts the evidence of the applicant and finds that it was her October 10, 2022, WhatsApp message to Mrs Farquharson-Morrison which likely triggered her request for the applicant to resume work on a part-time basis and at a temporary location.

“That notwithstanding, the Tribunal finds that Mrs Farquharson-Morrison’s October 12, 2022 letter, which requested that the applicant resume work on October 17, 2022, came too late. Additionally, the Tribunal finds the timing of the respondent’s request that the applicant return to work as nothing more than a futile attempt to rebut the fact that the applicant had, in actuality, been made redundant by the respondent on July 8, 2022,” the Tribunal added.

“In conclusion, the Tribunal finds it unfortunate that the parties’ enduring relationship deteriorated in the way that it did. Indeed, in light of their close relationship, it is even more unfortunate that the parties could not independently arrive at a mutually beneficial negotiated agreement. That notwithstanding, it is the finding of the Tribunal that the applicant was on July 8, 2022, made redundant pursuant to section 26(2)(a) of the Employment (Amendment) Act 2017.”