CCJ judgment demonstrates concern for sugar workers

Aug 03, 2018 News

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) has recognised that several sections of the press reported about the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) judgment regarding the Union and the colleague union – the National Association of Agricultural, Commercial and Industrial Employees (NAACIE).
The two unions had filed a legal challenge to the decision by the Government of Guyana and the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc. (GuySuCo) to close Skeldon, Rose Hall and East Demerara Estates at the end of 2017.
Those reports reflected on several aspects of the judgment, which demonstrates the breadth of the matter and the comprehensiveness of the issues that were put before the CCJ.
“While indeed the CCJ disagreed with our representations regarding the adequacy of consultations on the estate closures, the Honourable Justices pointed out that the Government and GuySuCo just met the ‘…minimum requirements of meaningful consultations …”, GAWU stated in a release.
Indeed this says a lot especially when one considers that thousands of Guyanese have been affected by the estate closures, it added.
“The satisfaction, of the barest minimum of engagement when considering the consequences of the decisions that were taken, is a matter, we believe, our decision-makers cannot be elated about. “It goes to show, in our view, that the decision-makers were engaged in a mere ritualistic exercise without any sincere consideration of how to avoid the repercussions of the closure.”
The CCJ determined that the consultations between the Unions and the Government/GuySuCo were not perfect or ideal.
The Court said, “[i]n a matter of such national importance impacting such large number of workers the process could have been more extensive and more responsive to the concerns of the Applicants [GAWU and NAACIE]”.
The Justices opined that “[n]otwithstading the absence of a statutory obligation the Respondents ought to have given a considered response (whether written or oral) to the GAWU’s proposals explaining why they were not adopted”.
GAWU contends that such explanation would have been unconvincing recognizing that several of the Union’s proposals have been adopted by GuySuCo towards making the industry viable.
The Court also felt that the Government and GuySuCo should have engaged the Unions regarding its plans for alternative employment for the now jobless workers.
The CCJ found that the High Court and Court of Appeal erred when they deemed that the Sugar Commission of Inquiry (CoI) “…was sufficient to satisfy the obligation to consult…”
The Justices found that closure was not recommended by the CoI and, therefore, GAWU and NAACIE were not able to make their views known on the matter. The CCJ also disagreed with the lower courts, which determined that the Unions only remedy for GuySuCo’s contravention of the Trade Union Recognition Act was limited to the penalty of a fine of $56,000 and to imprisonment of six months, which is prescribed in the Act.
“We were also heartened to note that the CCJ recognised that the sugar industry has undoubtedly played a large part in the socio-economic development of Guyana. Thus, its future was an issue of national importance and required vigorous discussions with all stakeholders before an informed decision could be made.
“In this regard, the Respondents could have engaged with the Applicants on a deeper level…”
This is a stain of notoriety that further demonstrates the Administration’s lack of concern, GAWU noted.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News