Gov’t representatives should have attended

Feb 18, 2016 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
My attention was drawn to the subject captioned “Agri Ministry challenges severance projection for Wales workers” that was carried in another section of the media on February 16. Had the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) attended the Morau House symposium symposium they could have been edified on the context that the severance was articulated. The Ministry of Agriculture needs to appreciate that when the lives of 1,800 workers are at stake, it’s an occasion of solemnity.
My assumption was based on 1,500 out 1,800 workers opting for severance, taking into consideration the provision in the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act, which at Clause 21 (4) (b)states inter alia “severance or redundancy shall not apply where the employee unreasonably refuses in case of redundancy to accept an offer of re-employment by the same employer at the same place of employment or WITHIN A RADIUS OF 10 MILES THEREFROM under no less favourable conditions than those such employee enjoyed immediately prior to the termination”. Uitvlugt is 21 miles from the host estate, Wales; as such employees have a clear option to deny redeployment to Uitvlugt and opt for severance. It was under this assumption, given the long distance of commuting between the 2 estates, corroborated by previous instances of redundancies where workers opt for severance as a first choice and the current labour establishment at Uitvlugt that informed my estimate. At the symposium I estimated that the cost of severance to 1,500 workers based on an average 15 years of service and an average weekly income of $15,000 will be approximately $675M. Provision was made for a section of the workforce that worked for less than 15 years. Had I used the wage levels from the report of the Commission of Inquiry, the cost would have been estimated to be a lot higher.
I wish to advise the MOA that taking workers from Wales to Uitvlugt comes with a significant add-on cost – the payment of a hefty daily disturbance allowance to all harvesters and some categories of field workers who will be required to commute between the 2 estates. Uitvlugt has been aggressively pursuing the conversion of its lands towards mechanized layouts with the intention of reducing its dependency on manual labour, whilst the factory’s manpower establishment is at a saturation point of 220 workers. The question is – would Uitvlugt factory be able to absorb an additional 180 workers from Wales factory and 1,200 agriculture workers when it has 1,250 of its own, bearing in mind the land conversion that is taking place?I need not mention the approximate 300 security personnel and junior management staff from Wales. What will be their fate?
The closure of Wales cannot be associated with that of LBI factory, since the distance between LBI and Enmore, where the factory workers were deployed, is 9 miles. In this instance, the company did not entertain any option for severance, because the distance was within a 10 mile radius, and the opportunity of staffing the Packaging Plant prevailed at the time.
The engagements with the workers that the MOA said had involved the “leadership” of the Unions have been met with denial by GAWU. The MOA further stated that the second meeting with the farmers “was most cordial and constructive”. Unfortunately, the article captioned “Belle Vue cane farmers not optimistic about the future” does not vindicate the MOA’s sentiments. The farmers of this cooperative, who constitutes 10% of the entire cane farming block at Wales, said they “don’t believe that taking canes across the coast to the Uitvlugt estate is feasible”. Further, “skepticism has already been expressed by farmers as to whether this is feasible or affordable”.
I wish to assure the MOA that my participation at the symposium was never intended to denounce the intention to close Wales estate, but was simply to open an opportunity to intelligently debate the socio/economic implications of the closure, the funding and viability of any agricultural diversification activity, and the development of a sound communications strategy to deal with the imminent closure. Having served the company for over 35 years, I was really taken aback by the apparent sarcastic statement “Sadly, this coming from a former Human Resources Director of GuySuCo!” Had the MOA and/or GuySuCo attended the symposium, they would have seen the wisdom for inclusivity in dealing with the most contentious issue the sugar industry is currently facing in modern history. Sadly, they did not attend.
Jai Petam
Former Human Resources Director
GuySuCo

---

---