Sascha Wilson
Senior Reporter
sascha.wilson@guardian.co.tt
An employee of the Board of Inland Revenue (BIR) is suing her employer, after she was reassigned to another department after being accused of practising “voodoo.”
Through her attorney Kiran Panday, Mindy Ramoutar, a clerk typist I and acting stenographer II, sent a pre-action protocol letter on February 10 to Commissioner of Inland Revenue and chairman of the board, Deomati Ramdass.
According to the letter, in September 2024, Ramoutar was gifted a cultural artefact by her colleague, who had returned from vacation in the United States. She placed the artefact on her work desk, which she had full authority to use.
Ramoutar received a letter from the Human Resource Department (HR) on December 10, 2024, informing her that she was being reassigned to the BIR’s Legal Unit.
After reviewing the letter, the attorney said, his client returned it to HR because it failed to state the reasons for her reassignment.
The pre-action protocol letter stated, “You indicated to her that she was involved in the practice of “voodoo” and showed her a picture of the artefact which was on your cellular phone. My client informed you that the aforementioned artefact was a gift from a colleague of BIR who had returned from New Orleans and isn’t associated with voodoo.”
He said Ramoutar proceeded on vacation leave on January 6 as she “was suffering from shock and embarrassment due to your histrionics” and the allegation made against her.
When Ramoutar returned to work on February 3 she was denied access to the 22nd floor, where she performs her duties.
Eventually, a colleague allowed her inside and informed her security was advised to restrict her access, as she was no longer allowed on that floor.
Panday said Ramoutar sent correspondence to Ramdass requesting justification from the board about her reassignment and Dan responded, indicating she agreed with Ramoutar seeking an explanation.
He said Ramdass’ correspondence stated, “It is my opinion that the request to have Ms Ramoutar reassigned is in the best interest of the organisation.
“I am sure that with Ms Ramoutar’s knowledge in IRD’s functioning, she will be an asset to the Legal Unit where she has been reassigned.”
Panday, in the letter, indicated that Ramdass failed and/or neglected to provide his client with any justification for her decision to reassign her to the Legal Unit of the BIR.
“My client was victimised based on her being accused of practicing ‘voodoo,’ which is completely untrue as she is a devout Hindu. Your actions have caused my client to suffer feelings of embarrassment, emotional and physical distress which have severely affected her professional and private life.”
He said Ramoutar was desirous of returning to her duties as an acting stenographer.
Failure to do so, he said, would result in the filing of High Court Proceedings to compel her to do it. Ramoutar is also requesting $1,500 compensation for her legal costs. Ramdass has 28 days to respond or face legal action.