SINCE the APNU+AFC administration came to office, it is fair to say that it has a less than exemplar relationship with the trade unions. What is striking about this is that when the parties were in opposition, they were vocal, confronting the PPP/C on its treatment of workers and disregard for the laws and collective bargaining.
The society will recall that the administrations of Bharrat Jagdeo and Donald Ramotar imposed yearly increased wages and salaries on public service workers. These workers could have relied on the then political opposition to stand in their corner, join in condemnation of the Government, and call for respect for collective bargaining. It is fair to say that given these pronouncements, the trade unions were made to feel they had friends in the APNU and AFC, who respected their right to existence, and role as a stakeholder in society.

The relationship between the trade unions and the Bharrat Jagdeo Government was at best thorny and at worst adversarial. It was during his administration that collective bargaining with several unions came to an end inasmuch as they exited Recognition Agreements. The 1999 Armstrong Award for public servants, which covered a three-year period, was never implemented in its entirety.

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), a union seen as the industrial arm of the PPP/C, was threatened with de-recognition during the President Jagdeo Government.

The management of the Bauxite Company of Guyana Incorporated (BCGI) refused to negotiate with the recognised union, the Guyana Bauxite and General Workers Union (GB&GWU), which started during the Jagdeo Government. What is even more troubling, in addition to expecting foreign investors to adhere to good international corporate practices and respect the host country’s laws, more importantly the Government of Guyana is part owner of BCGI.

To President Donald Ramotar’s credit, it could be said that his choice of Minister of Labour, Dr Nanda Gopaul, the industrial relations landscape took a turn for the better. Though it equally could be said that there remained much work to reverse what was perceived as PPP/C Government hostility to the trade unions.

It is reasonable to conclude that Gopaul’s presence in the Cabinet and his industrial relations credentials were signals being sent by the Ramotar Government that it wanted to foster a new approach in labour relations.
Through political lens, Ramotar’s decision could have been construed that his Government was returning to the working-class roots the party’s first leader, Dr Cheddi Jagan, stood on.

Notably, it was during Gopaul’s tenure as minister that efforts were pursued to bring the Guyana Public Service Union and the Government of Guyana to the bargaining table.  In the sugar industry, Gopaul opted to impose arbitration to resolve wages and salaries differences between the union and management. This decision meant avoiding strikes and reducing antagonism between the union and management.

In the instance of the BCGI and GB&GWU, the Labour Act was enforced, which saw the minister ordering compulsory arbitration in an effort to bring resolution to outstanding issues and normalcy to the workplace.

More importantly, this act could be construed as taking a stand for Guyana’s sovereignty and respect for its laws and citizens. This matter was taken to court by the BCGI management on the pretext of the use of a name. The High Court took a decision to have the Minister of Labour re-issue a letter of arbitration, which was accepted by the State’s lawyers. This decision was taken in 2012. It is 2016 and the matter still hangs in abeyance.

In May 2015 APNU+AFC was elected to office with public support from significant sections of the trade union community. At the reading of the Government’s first budget in August 2015, this relationship started showing serious cracks. Public servants were made aware at the budget reading that wages and salaries will be imposed on them, in disregard for the right to collective bargaining, and represented a continuation of the treatment meted out to them by the Jagdeo and Ramotar administrations.

The unions vociferously expressed dissatisfaction to this treatment, notably from parties who condemned similar act when they were in opposition. A ray of hope was extended when Minister of State Joseph Harmon apologised for the act of imposition and committed that the Government will not do it again. Notwithstanding that commitment, this year the Guyana Public Service Union dedicated significant energies calling on the Government to commence negotiations for wages, salaries, and other conditions of work. Thankfully, this is presently taking place.

The industrial relations climate in sugar, bauxite, and the education sectors are very tenuous and appear to be getting more adversarial. The GB&GWU and BCGI are yet to meet, inasmuch as the judiciary has spoken. If Guyanese workers are not assured that the Government will respect the decision of the High Court and take positions consistent with the law, then what can they expect to ensure justice for them?

The unions in the sugar industry continue to express concerns that they are being bypassed or ignored on matters pertaining to workers, even though they are the workers’ legitimate representatives. Negotiations between the Guyana Teachers Union and the Ministry of Education are at a standstill, since no progress appears to have been made.

While these conflicts exist, the minister that has responsibility for labour, who under the Labour Laws is the chief Conciliator, is taking no action to bring about resolutions.

The trade unions have themselves expressed dissatisfaction that there is no ministry dedicated to labour, which they noted is a first for Guyana, and also their displeasure with the performance of the minister assigned labour responsibilities.

This editorial does not pretend to cover all issues relating to the trade union landscape, but is pointing to issues that have been in the public domain for quite some time now.

What is noticeable and conflicting is that while President David Granger prides himself on being supportive and respecting of the trade unions, their historical role in the development of  society, those whom he has appointed to serve in the Executive seem not to be mindful or respecting of his views. This disconnect seems to heighten the trade unions scepticism that this Government is as anti-labour as the Jagdeo Government.

Guyana cannot develop when any group feels it is not being given due respect and treated with due regard. In the workforce this perception, real or perceived, will negatively impact production and productivity. If this Government is not anti-labour, it needs to provide the workers and trade unions the needed assurance through engagement and resolution of issues, too long outstanding.