–Min. Scott’s handling of engagement with BCGI management

ARTICLE 147 of the Guyana Constitution expressly states, “…no person shall be hindered…to form or belong to…trade unions …for the protection of his or her interests.”

Last week, when Minister Keith Scott engaged the management of the Bauxite Company of Guyana Incorporated (BCGI), presumably to address the more-than-six-year-old impasse with the Guyana Bauxite & General Workers Union (GB&GWU), it was reasonably expected that this Article would have guided discussions.

BCGI is owned by RUSAL and the Government of Guyana, and what was very troubling in watching the engagement between the minister and the foreign management was that the minister did not seem to understand his role. In June 2012, the High Court issued a decision which stated that the letters for compulsory arbitration that were signed by the then Minister of Labour, Dr. Nanda Gopaul, in March 2012, must be reissued after a correction to the name of the company. The failure to date by the Government of Guyana to reissue the letters means that the Government is in contempt of the court.

This nation is reminded that the APNU and AFC, when in opposition, had consistently called on the PPP government to honour the court’s decision. It is instructive that Minister Scott is adding to the lawlessness of BCGI management in his advice to them to think about the matter of the treatment of workers and in three months’ time come back to him. Had the minister sought to acquaint himself with Labour relations, he would have known that fundamental rights and freedoms operate in the here and now, and that he has no authority under any law to defer them.

Any respect for the Laws of Guyana would guide conduct consistent with Article 147 of the Constitution. Section 23 (1) of the Trade Union Recognition Act expressly states that once a trade union exists, the employer has a duty to treat with it, and the ruling of the court in 2012.

Having taken the Oath of Office to uphold the rule of law, it was incumbent upon the minister to:

(1) Let BCGI management know the APNU+AFC government respects the court’s ruling, and present the letters to commence arbitration

(2) Ensure rights and freedoms are upheld in the here and now, which would have avoided embarrassment to this nation and open speculation that while he may have taken the Oath of Office, he may have also taken something else
And

(3) Use the opportunity to educate BCGI management of Section 23 (1) and the Government’s position to uphold it in response to the management saying they don’t want a union, when a legal Certificate of Recognition exists.

Given Scott’s performance, workers in this country will encounter serious problems with industrial relations. The Government’s claim of pursuing a Green Economy is also in for trouble, given that the Core Labour Standards which are a pillar of this economy are being placed under supervisory responsibility of someone who knows not, and seems delighted in such position.

It should be said that since operations commenced at Aroaima during the Desmond Hoyte administration, workers are housed in accommodation that makes no provision for them to prepare their meals for themselves. The company provides this service.  When the management spoke to this issue, it was not one of benevolence or testimony of kindness, but a responsibility of theirs.

This nation would remember BCGI workers speaking out against the faeces of rats and the presence of roaches in the food supplies, and insanitary condition of the kitchen where their meals were prepared. Those who spoke out against this health hazard were dismissed.

Another area of concern is the minister’s apparent lack of understanding of the difference between termination and dismissal. For him to make the case that the workers who were not paid while they were dismissed for cause speak to a clear misunderstanding. Once dismissed for cause, the employee can challenge the decision, and is entitled to representation by the union. On termination, this treatment is guided by the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act.

The reason why Minister Nanda Gopaul ordered compulsory arbitration into the BCGI matter has been the result of (1) the company being in breach of Section 23(1) of the Trade Union Recognition Act in its refusal to treat with the recognised union; (2) several outstanding issues to be addressed from May 2009 to 2012, when arbitration was ordered.

Minister Scott is called on to go back to the drawing broad, or acknowledge that such matters are not within his competencies, and recuse himself. The matter of Industrial relations is not about gut-feeling and flippancy; it is guided by a body of rules, laws, conventions and time-honoured principles.