The GPSU should avoid controversy

May 03, 2017 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The members of the Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) will be the ultimate arbiters of the outcome of the union’s elections which have been marred with controversy. It is for the members to decide on the future of the union, not the courts.
Reports in the media at press time indicate that the incumbent President Patrick Yarde has been declared the winner of the elections by the Chief Elections Officer. One of the candidates has indicated that there may be a legal challenge to the results of the elections.
The entire elections process has been shrouded in confusion, with the most perverse being the long time that it took for the winner to be announced. This is bound to raise doubts about the integrity of the process. In fact, one the losing candidates who it was felt in many quarters had won the elections, was not, as widely expected, declared the winner.
There is unfortunately, not much chance of any successful legal challenge. It is this column’s opinion that the court does not have jurisdiction to review the conduct of elections of private associations.
If the courts begin to dabble in the conduct of elections, it may find itself having to adjudicate in all manner of elections, including that of boy scouts and elections for schoolroom presidents.
The conduct of elections of private associations is an internal matter. It is a matter for the membership of the union and not the courts.
There is no law guiding the conduct of elections in trade unions. Each trade union has its own rules. The courts will find it difficult to justify having jurisdiction.
The membership of the GPSU will therefore have to decide what action they are going to take. The options, however, are not many, but do include large numbers of public servants refusing to become members or pay union dues or agency fees to the union.
The GPSU, however, is one of the stronger unions in the country. It is a major union. The weakening of the union will have an impact on the overall strength of the trade union movement.
It is for this reason that the Guyana Trade Union Congress (GTUC) should consider intervening in this dispute. The GTUC should try to determine whether there were any serious enough irregularities to annul the elections and, if so, whether grounds exist for any sanctions to be taken against the union. Not that this will make much of a difference to the outcome, since once the results have been declared, it is almost impossible for it to be overturned.
The GTUC, however, will be expected to take a stand on the issue of internal democracy within unions. It should be forced to, at least, make a pronouncement as to whether the elections held for the Executive of the Guyana Public Service Union met acceptable standards of democratic conduct.
If the findings are that the elections are above board, then the disputing party or parties should be asked to accept the will of the membership. If, on the other hand, irregularities were found, then the GTUC should at least try to convince the new Executive that fresh and transparent elections would be held within six months, in everyone’s interest.
Once there is controversy over the results of the elections, then this spells difficulties for public servants, since it would lead to a divided leadership of the GPSU and a divided membership. It will be near impossible for the union to be taken seriously by the government in any negotiations, since the government would be aware of the gulf within the leadership and between the leadership and the union.
One of the things which Guyanese can do without, at this time, is contested elections, be it union or national elections. Guyana needs to move away, at all levels, from this culture of controversial elections. It is not healthy for the trade union movement; it is not good for the country.
The Guyana Public Service Union does not need a controversy over elections. The union has suffered ‘eyepass’ from the PPPC regime and now the APNU+AFC.
The leadership of the union needed a clear democratic mandate from its membership so that it could strengthen its hand in negotiations within the government. The controversy over the elections will not provide the union with the sort of renewed mandate which is necessary for it to be firm with the government.
The government should not meddle in union business. The government should address the charge that there was political meddling in the GPSU elections. The ruling party should explain why a programme that it is associated with hosted one of the candidate for the elections. This should never have happened.
If the government is serious about trade union democracy it should stay clear of inference but should consider passing laws to direct a system which would ensure free and fair elections within registered trade unions.

---

---