DVLA Union Leader Hounded for Championing Staff Interests

Concerns are emerging over the hounding of the National Chairman of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority Workers Union, Prince David Orchill, following a recent action taken by the union in the utmost interest of the staff of the DVLA.
Mr Orchill, who was threatened by management to desist from acting in the interest of the workers, has been transferred to the DVLA regional office at Bolgatanga, some 773 km away from the seat of management and that of the National Labour Commission (NLC), which is the adjudicator of labour-related issues.
The transfer, which flagrantly violates the agreed-upon procedure in Article 28 of the DVLA Collective Agreement, followed a meeting with management of the DVLA in which the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Julius Neequaye Kotey, explicitly threatened to revoke the union’s office space provided by management and transfer the National Chairman and the General Secretary to the Bolgatanga and Wa offices, respectively.
Timelines
A timeline of events highlights a worrying trend where the union Chairman is being victimised simply for playing his role as an advocate of workers’ welfare.
Documents available to the Daily Statesman highlight that the punitive transfer followed an engagement between the union and management on welfare issues through a written petition, which was escalated to the National Labour Commission and followed by the setting of a deadline for strike action. Subsequently, the NLC wrote to remind management to respond to the issues raised in the petition, hence the transfer in direct violation of Sections 127(1), 127(2), 128 and 129 of the Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651).

Political victimisation
Information available to the Daily Statesman house highlights that the union chair is being hounded due to a wrongful perception of a non-existent allegiance with the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), allegedly making it difficult for the new administration under the National Democratic Congress (NDC) to work with him. Sources say the new management, upon the assumption of office, threatened to use all means to unseat Mr Orchill as the union chairman, and the transfer to Bolgatanga is meant to render him ineffective in the discharge of his lawful duties as union president, as part of a grand scheme to remove him from office.
Even more worrying is the fact that the union chairman was just recently transferred from his old office to the Adentan office some seven months ago, raising serious questions about the motive behind the transfer. Additionally, the transfer, mid-year, makes it practically impossible for him to confer with the employer or workers on matters affecting members, and thereby denying the union the effective representation guaranteed by Section 129(1) of the Labour Act.
Article 28 of the DVLA Collective Agreement mandates all transfers to be made at the end of an academic year and, in cases involving the transfer of union executives, the union shall be consulted, raising concerns over the transfer of the union president without consultation and in mid-year.
Petition
Documents available indicate that the petition leading to the alleged victimisation and intimidation of the union president was submitted to DVLA management in November 2025, in which the union raised grave concerns over unfair labour practices being meted out to employees, as well as persistent breaches of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, the Collective Agreement (2022–2024), the Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651), and the DVLA’s approved Scheme of Service (2023) by management, undermining staff welfare, due process, industrial peace, and the integrity of the Authority as a public institution, and which may lead to industrial unrest if not mitigated immediately.
Some of the concerns raised included irregularities in the promotion exercise contrary to the recommendations of the duly constituted Promotion Committee; arbitrary and unlawful staff transfers, including the transfer of female employees who are nursing mothers with infants below the age of eighteen (18) months; the imposition of transfer notices requiring employees to report to new stations within two weeks, a clear deviation from the stipulated notice period; non-payment of lawful transfer grants; poor internal communication; nepotism and unlawful appointments,
Other concerns in the petition included public levelling of unsubstantiated allegations of corruption against directors of the Authority; and the use of personal social media platforms as a primary channel for official communication, bringing the Authority into disrepute; lack of health insurance coverage for staff; opening of new offices without consultation; and premature implementation of the 24-hour economy policy.