The tribunal called to investigate the termination of a CableVision employee which sparked off a three-day strike in the wake of Hurricane Fabian last year overstepped its boundaries, CableVision lawyer Saul Froomkin claimed yesterday.

However, lawyers for the tribunal, the Bermuda Industrial Union, and the employee ? David Green ? claimed otherwise at an appeal in Supreme Court yesterday morning.

CableVision is appealing the investigation of the tribunal, saying that the terms of reference set down by Labour Minister Randy Horton called for an investigation solely into the events leading up to Mr. Green's termination ? and not in the days after.

Hundreds of BIU workers went on the general strike just days after Hurricane Fabian devastated the Island last year in protest at the sacking of Mr. Green.

It was claimed that CableVision manager Jeremy Elmas had fired the technician because he allegedly conspired to get colleagues to go slow on repairs, chalking up more overtime earnings. However, the union claimed Mr. Green had been fired over a joke made by someone else, for which he was blamed.

The mass walk out brought public transport and Island-wide clean up after the hurricane to a grinding halt, shutting down the Hamilton docks and repairs on the Causeway. The public called foul loudly, claiming the timing was wrong for strike.

After three days, Mr. Horton invoked the Trade Disputes Act and then-Attorney General Paula Cox took out an injunction, giving Government the power of arrest over strikers who did not return to work. Union members swiftly returned to their jobs.

The tribunal has since met and made a report, however that report was not released in court yesterday.

The Minister could have made the terms of reference for the tribunal wider to include the strike in the days after the termination, however he did not, Mr. Froomkin argued. If a tribunal is not restricted to matters referred to it, he said, they could expand into any area, regardless of the dispute at hand or the wishes of the Minister.

The Minister specified the tribunal examine the circumstances surrounding the termination, Mr. Froomkin argued, not what happened afterwards.

However lawyer Mark Diel, acting for the Trade Disputes Tribunal, took a different view of the meaning of the word "surrounding", saying that meant the events before and after the termination.

Though he accepted the wording of the terms of reference were "not the best", Mr. Diel said the first paragraph ? which Mr. Froomkin did not refer to ? called for an investigation into how one individual dispute could so rapidly evolve into an Island-wide strike, particularly at such a disastrous time.

The judgment on whether or not the tribunal overstepped its boundaries when investigating the incident will be handed down tomorrow morning in the Court of Appeals. If the judges agree with Mr. Froomkin's argument, the tribunal's report will become nullified.