By Victor Fanuel
HARARE — Nine employees of Lobels Holdings (Private) Limited, some of whom have worked for the breadmaking giant for more than 20 years, have dragged the company before the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare over alleged unfair labour practices.
The aggrieved workers accuse management of manipulating their remuneration structure to short-change them on employment benefits.
Represented by Mudimu and Maguranyanga Legal Practitioners, they have formally referred a dispute of right to the Labour Officer, alleging that Lobels Holdings (Private) Limited has reneged on written salary undertakings dating back to 2019.
In a letter dated November 9, 2026, addressed to the Labour Officer at Makombe Government Complex in Harare, the lawyers accuse the company of unilaterally restructuring their remuneration by allocating just 25 percent of their agreed monthly earnings to basic salary while classifying the remaining 75 percent as hardship allowance.
“Our clients have been in the employ of the Respondent for considerable periods, with some having served the organisation for more than twenty (20) years.
“They have, over the years, discharged their employment obligations and rendered services to the Employer in circumstances where they legitimately expected their remuneration and other employment benefits to be administered in accordance with their contracts of employment and the Employer’s written undertakings,” the lawyers said.
“Sometime in 2019, the Employer undertook a salary review and communicated revised salary arrangements to the Complainants through individual salary review letters.
“In those communications, the Employer expressly undertook to pay each employee a specified monthly basic salary.
“The salary review communications state that the Employer would no longer pay allowances, including hardship allowance, and that the revised basic salaries communicated to the respective employees would constitute the applicable remuneration going forward,” added the lawyers.
According to the lawyers, Lobels subsequently departed from these written commitments, introducing a remuneration structure that the employees neither agreed to nor were consulted about.
In the letter submitted to the Labour Officer by the nine workers, the disputed arrangement is said to have direct implications for the calculation of several employment benefits, including overtime payments, cash in lieu of leave days and pension contributions, which are determined using basic salary.
The lawyers argue that by allocating only a quarter of the agreed remuneration to basic salary, the company has effectively reduced the earnings used to calculate these benefits, leaving the employees financially prejudiced.
They contend that such a fundamental change to the terms and conditions of employment cannot be imposed unilaterally, particularly where individual salary review letters had already established the applicable remuneration arrangements.
Despite engaging management and making demands for the disputed salary structure to be corrected, the workers claim that Lobels has refused to address their concerns.
“Instead, the Employer has unilaterally adopted a remuneration structure in terms of which only twenty-five per cent (25%) of the agreed monthly remuneration is reflected as basic salary, whilst seventy-five per cent (75%) is allocated to hardship allowance.
“This, the Employer continues to unilaterally implement despite that it was not agreed to by the employees.
“The Employer has effectively and unilaterally varied the contract of employment with its employees without the Complainants being consulted or agreeing to or being involved in such a material variation of the contract of employment,” the lawyers said.
They further maintain that their clients expected the company to consult them and obtain their consent before introducing any material changes to their contractual remuneration arrangements.
Having failed to resolve the matter through engagements with management, the nine employees have now turned to the Labour Officer for intervention under the Labour Act.
“Despite engagements and demands, the Employer has failed, neglected and refused to correct this anomaly leaving complainants with no option but to seek your good office’s intervention in resolving this industrial relations dispute,” the lawyers wrote.
The lawyers have asked the Labour Officer to facilitate the resolution of the dispute and secure appropriate relief for the affected employees.
Lobels’ human resources manager was also copied on the November 9 complaint.
The company’s response to the allegations was not included in the correspondence.
