…threatens resumption of strike action

THE Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) has rejected the appointment of Professor Leyland Lucas as chairman of the arbitration panel and has threatened the resumption of strike action in seven days, unless legal agreements are adhered to.

The union is also accusing Junior Minister of Social Protection with responsibility for Labour, Keith Scott, of misapplying the1990 Memorandum of Understanding and September 6, 2018 Terms of Resumption, both signed by the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the GTU.
The GTU was a no-show at Wednesday’s meeting scheduled with the MoE and at the Ministry of Social Protection (MoSP) to finalise and sign the Terms of Reference for arbitration. Coming out of the MoSP boardroom where the parties were expected to meet, Chief Labour Officer (CLO) Charles Ogle confirmed, some 30 minutes after the scheduled 13:00hrs appointment, that the GTU would not attend.

This was further corroborated by GTU President Mark Lyte by telephone and later by GTU General-Secretary Coretta McDonald at the GTU office on Woolford Avenue, where she spoke to the media. “The Guyana Teachers’ Union will not be attending the meeting scheduled for today 26th September, 2018 with the Department of Labour, because of growing concerns that Minister Keith Scott either wants to take teachers for a ride or has no interest in ensuring the establishment of an arbitration panel to resolve the matters relating to securing a multi-year agreement with the Ministry of Education,” the document she presented, stated.

McDonald further explained to the media that there is both compulsory and voluntary arbitration– the latter of which the GTU has entered into with the MoE and which takes on a different process.

She stressed that the 1990 Memorandum of Agreement states that in the case of voluntary arbitration, “the Ministry of Labour shall nominate the chairman in the event the parties fail to reach agreement,” while putting emphasis on the word ‘nominate.’

The union also stated that the September 2018 ToR stipulates that the chairperson, when nominated, should be “agreed to by the employer and the GTU,” meaning that no chair can be appointed without the consent of the involved parties.

“With Voluntary Arbitration, it is expected that the chair will have the confidence of both sides that are in the dispute. In this specific case, Dr. Leyland Lucas cannot be appointed by Minister Scott. The MoE and GTU will have to agree on the nominee, after which the nominee from the MoE and the GTU will be empanelled as a board with specific Terms of Reference and in receipt of their specific instrument to perform. This is the reason ‘nominate’ has been stated as it related to the MoE representative, the GTU representative and the chairperson,” the document stated.

Along with the chairman, the MoE and GTU are expected to each nominate one person to the panel, amounting to a panel of three persons to decide on much-disputed salary increases for teachers.

But, with the new complications arising, the GTU has urged Dr. Lucas to “recuse himself from a process that is not in accordance with industrial relations practices, laws and time-honoured principles.”

They also clarified that their grouse has nothing to do with Lucas’ “qualifications or perceived competencies.” They have, instead, turned their dissatisfaction to Minister Scott, whom they claim continues to hinder the due process.

“When it was GTU’s turn to name its nominee, in barged the Minister of Labour, who is within the Ministry of Social Protection, Honourable Keith Scott with a very nicely dressed young man and we were told: ‘I will have to interrupt this meeting, but I must do it at this stage because I have to introduce to you the chairperson for the arbitration panel’,” McDonald recounted. She added that the GTU was “taken aback,” because it was not the appropriate meeting for that purpose; they had from the inception rejected the involvement of Minister Scott and had made known their preference that the chairman would not be an employee of the state.

The union is also disappointed that previous nominees put forward, such as Rashleigh Jackson, Jeffrey Thomas and Aubrey Armstrong were rejected.

But at the same time, with the deadline given these matters to be ironed out, the GTU is positive that if the strike resumes it will receive even more support than before. “The teachers who were out there and those who were not out there, they are ready to hit the streets as we speak. As a matter of fact, let me say to you, other entities are only waiting for the GTU to call that day and they’ll be ready to join us,” McDonald stated.

The MoE also sent out its own release on Wednesday, prior to the scheduled meeting, advising teachers about the legal implications of any strike action. “During the consideration of the matter in dispute, under the grievance procedure, there shall be no strike, stoppage of work — whether of a partial or general nature — go slow, boycott, picketing, retardation of production or any other interference with the ministry’s operations by the union, nor shall there be any lockout or any other form of interference by the ministry. Both parties shall endeavour to maintain a state of normal industrial relations,” the release highlighted.

It was made in reference to guidelines of the Memorandum of Agreement –‘The Avoidance and Settlement of Disputes’ signed by the GTU and MoE on July 7, 1983. The MoE’s statement went on to affirm: “Teachers are therefore kindly advised to have due regard to the above legal stipulation and should note that any action which violates or is adverse to the above shall be illegal, for which the ministry will ensure that the appropriate consequences ensue.”

Meanwhile, the MoSP further stated in a release: “It is the union which demanded that the issue be referred to a tribunal and any attempt to walk away from the process at this stage or to disrupt the smooth functioning of the arbitration machinery must be discouraged.”