THE general strike called Monday by the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers’ Union (GAWU) in the sugar industry came as a surprise as there was no prior indication of any brewing differences. Maybe the workers, union officials and management were aware of what was imminent but the general public was caught totally unaware.
According to the union, the thousands of striking workers are insisting that Guysuco indicate its intention in terms of approving a 15 percent increase in wages and salaries for 2010.
“Despite a number of meetings between the corporation and the union, including discussions with the Chief Executive Officer (ag) of the corporation and the Chairman of Guysuco’s Board, the corporation continues to avoid reference to any upward adjustment of its remuneration,” GAWU claimed.
It said that the corporation’s current predicament of securing under 60 percent attendance of cane cutters on any working day to harvest canes is a result of the continuous falling purchasing power of the workers “evidenced by inflation rates overtaking real increase in pay, in recent years.”
GAWU said that over the past few years, before October or the first week of October, the corporation had been able to indicate a percentage of pay hike.
“The corporation’s inference at last Friday’s meeting between the two parties that production of 264,000 tonnes sugar would have to precede an offer by the corporation is unacceptable,” the union contended.
It said that the corporation’s representative informed the union’s negotiators that, at this time, the corporation is not too clear that 264,000 tonnes could be achieved for 2010, and on that basis it is not in a position to make an offer.
“The union, however, cannot agree to having the wage increase determined at the conclusion of the year’s production. This is not normal union-company procedure,” GAWU insisted.
If what GAWU is claiming is true then, in the interest of harmonious industrial relations, which is so vital to production, the management of the corporation should have conveyed to the workers and the union the reason(s) for the departure from the traditional procedure with respect to wage hikes.
That is if they did not do so. With such a preventative approach, strike action by the workers might have been averted because strikes are least welcome in the context of the poor financial state of the corporation and lower production levels over the past few years.
As regards the issue of low turnout by workers, the underlying reason for this has to be dealt with squarely or else the situation will not improve.
However, in fairness to the corporation, its inability to pay higher wages is constrained by lower production, financial losses and of course the devastating effects of the European Union’s drastic cuts in sugar prices.
The industry is in a delicate state and if it is not managed with caution and astuteness, it could very well collapse.
With a rising cost of living, workers are bound to agitate for increased wages and this is quite understandable, especially when one considers that in recent years they have not had significant increases.
Nevertheless, the union and the workers have to look at the bigger picture of saving the industry and therefore exercise greater restraint and use the strike weapon only as a last resort.
Fortunately, in this instance, the strike is not prolonged and perhaps the union and workers simply want to send a message that they are dissatisfied with their current wages and this dissatisfaction should be addressed with the desired level of urgency.