EnglishLabor Rights & UnionsSocial Rights

For the 6th time, Cairo Appeal Court endorsed the judgement issued in favor of Nagy Rashad, a Labor leader, and rejected the claims and demands raised by South Cairo and Giza Flour Mills and Bakeries

Arabic version

Cairo Appeal Court ended a chapter of  oppression practiced by the administration of South Cairo and Giza flour Mills and Backeries against Nagy Rashad, a labor leader. As the Company fabricated charges  of  embezzlement against Rashad, who  had obtained a court ruling during Mubarak’s regime to raise the minimum wage, suspended him from work, and reported his dismissal order to the Labor Court, which submitted a claim to second an expert. Then, the expert’s report cleared Mr. Nagy from liability of any charges directed to him.

The Court accepted the expert’s report and decided to refuse his dismissal. Moreover, the Court decided in favor of the defendant to return to his work, with all the consequences. Then, the Center’s lawyers were surprised that the company didn’t implement the aforementioned ruling, and appealed against it.

After deliberating the lawsuit before Cairo Appeal Court, the Court decided to refuse the Company’s appeal and to endorse the previous judgement in favor of Nagy Rashad, together with binding South Cairo and Giza Flour Mills Company to pay all his financial dues. In addition, the Court upheld the judgement of the Court of First Instance regarding the expert’s report filed in the case file which stated that:

“the appellee didn’t commit any violations regarding the alleged accusations and the consequences of suspending him from work and requesting his dismissal, based on sound technical, reasonable and acceptable grounds and the proofs written in the case papers. In addition, the Company didn’t submit any proof, thus the Court is satisfied with the expert’s report and refuses the Company’s requests.

It’s worth mentioning that Nagy was suspended from his work since April 2018 due to his activities in a number of cases related to the Company’s workers and their financial conditions. The decision to dismiss Nagy is considered the third attempt by the successive administrations of the Company since 2010.

Nagy occupied the leadership of a number of  trade union positions within the Company and outside it, including that he was an elected member with the highest votes in the Board of Directors of the Private Insurance Fund for the Company’s workers, and the Board of Directors of the Services and Welfare Association of the Company’s workers. This wasn’t the first time for Nagy to face such practices.

Moreover, he was previously suspended from his work, and faced several consecutive harassments and threats after filing the lawsuit of raising the minimum wage in which the Egyptian Center represented him, and succeeded in grabbing a historical judicial ruling at that time binding the Government to set a minimum wage in March 2010.

Rashad had been subjected to several malicious measures, including his referral to investigation for nine times with the knowledge of the Legal Affairs Department, and six times to the Administrative Prosecution. These investigations were based on unreal violations, thus were dismissed. Furthermore, the Company’s administrations issued five punitive decisions against him, including 21 days as penal actions.


And when all these decisions didn’t succeed in forcing him to withdraw the minimum wage lawsuit and to stop his labor and trade union activities, he was prevented from entering the Company’s Headquarter, and the Company stopped disbursing his salary in April 2009. Moreover, the Company issued a decision suspending him from working and submitted his dismissal order to the Court, however the Court rejected the decision to dismiss him and cancelled the previous decision.

After obtaining the Minimum Wage judicial ruling in March 2010, the Company issued a new decision to suspend Rashad from work and submitted the decision before the Court to consider the matter, however the Court ruled for the second time not to accept the dismissal request and decided his right to return to work.

Related Articles

Back to top button