UNIVERSITY of Guyana (UG), Pro-Chancellor Major General (retd) Joseph Singh said the UG Council supports the administration’s call for the wage dispute with the workers’ unions, to head to conciliation.

The University of Guyana Workers Union (UGWU) and the University of Guyana Senior Staff Association (UGSSA) had agreed to recommence negotiations into the wage dispute with the UG Administration and meet with the UG Council, at the behest of the pro-chancellor. The meeting was held on March 7.

“Even though the council was prepared to facilitate a process that will enable a return to the negotiating table by the unions and the administration… the unions have demonstrated their lack of trust and interest in such a process,” a release by UG related.

It added that Vice-Chancellor, Professor Ivelaw Griffith, indicated his preference for the impasse to be referred to the Ministry of Labour for conciliation.

“The council, now recognising that the facilitating role it has initiated has not been met with the desired response from the unions, has no option but to acknowledge and support the decision by the vice-chancellor and his administration to return to the Ministry of Labour’s conciliation process,” the release quoted the pro-chancellor as saying.

However, the unions indicated their displeasure at the meeting held on March 7 through a joint statement.

SIDELINED
According to the unions, this meeting’s agenda essentially sidelined the matters being raised by the workers by leaving these issues for last.

“We must ask how committed those who prepared the agenda were to actually discussing the worker-related items and deciding upon them,” the unions bemoaned.

The unions also indicated that no decision was made on the matter of the forensic audit, no response was given to the unions’ question as to whether the council would meet with staff, nor was there a response given to the request from the unions to have a special sub-committee set up to deal with human resources issues at the university. The matter of this sub-committee, according to the unions, has been deferred to the next council meeting, which they contend may be held in April.

“The decision was made to circulate the report for comments from the administration and the unions,” the unions said.

As part of the meeting too, the unions asked about the contractual situation of a number of senior administrators, including when the contracts of a number of senior administrators would end. And given that some contracts might be nearing an end, the unions indicated that they wanted them to be evaluated as part of any contract renewal process.

However, the release from UG indicated that the pro-chancellor expressed his regret at the course of action taken by the unions to distort the outcomes of the council meeting held on March 7, 2019, at which the unions’ representative was present and participated fully in the discussions and decisions of the council. The pro-chancellor is also chairman of UG Council.

At the meeting, the council was informed that formal communication was received from the vice-chancellor expressing an interest in the renewal of his contract of engagement upon its expiration later this year.

“In considering this matter, the council established a committee to recommend to the council the following: the criteria to be utilised in the evaluation; recommendations for the composition and terms of reference of the Evaluation Committee that will be appointed to conduct the evaluation process; and that the recommendations of the committee be presented to the council for its consideration by April 15, 2019,” the UG release noted.

BRIEF DISCUSSION
The UG release indicated that during the meeting, the council noted communication from the unions dated January 30, 2019, which detailed the unions’ concerns and had a brief discussion on the content of the letter, in spite of the absence of a quorum. It was however made known that some of the issues were substantially discussed as part of other agenda items of the meeting.

“However, the chairman directed that full consideration be given to the issues raised in the unions’ letter at the upcoming meeting of the university’s Finance and General Purposes Committee on March 20, 2019,” the release said.

In January, the unions protested against the imposition of a three per cent increase in salary for UA (academic) staff, and a four per cent increase for UB (support) staff, imposed last November and retroactive to January 1, 2018. The university stated that it cannot afford further increases.

Through the protest, the unions highlighted their desire for a forensic audit to be done on the institution, since they believe that funds are being misappropriated instead of being used to develop the teaching space. They also registered their concerns about the university having a “bloated senior administration”.

The unions also accused the pro-chancellor of showing bias during the engagement on March 7.

“The manner in which this meeting was conducted affirmed that while the individual members of the university’s council may possess interest and enthusiasm, that is not enough to galvanise council into action,” the unions related.

According to the unions, Major Singh made remarks in favour of members of the administration while allegedly expressing that he “did not think highly” of the unions’ leadership.