High Court orders Govt. to produce records of salary negotiations with GTU

Mar 20, 2024 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News

---

Kaieteur News – The High Court on Tuesday ordered the Ministry of Education’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Saddam Hussain to produce evidence that financial matters had been discussed with the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) during the period 2019 and 2023.

This was based on a request made by Attorney, Darren Wade in a Notice of Application filed on behalf of the GTU.

The attorney had inter alia sought several reliefs, including a Court Order that would force the Ministry of Education into collective bargaining for 2019 – 2023 with the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU).  He also wanted Chief Education Officer Sadam Hussain and Permanent Secretary Shannielle Hoosein-Outar to be held in contempt of court.

However, Wade was invited early during Tuesday’s proceedings to withdraw his application by Justice Sandil Kissoon as he explained that his court does not have the jurisdiction to grant the majority of the reliefs sought.

The judge noted that the only exception is request seeking the disclosure of all correspondences between the Union and the Education Ministry as it relates to the Collective Bargaining discussions.

Notwithstanding, Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, SC told the court that the Discovery Order is not necessary since the GTU should be in possession of the said documents.  He reasoned that if the Ministry and the GTU were engaged in discussions in which representatives from both sides signed off on the minutes of the meeting, then it is likely that each party would have copies of those minutes.

Wade nevertheless argued strongly that the Discovery Order is necessary since his client –the GTU does not possess any of the minutes of the meetings.  He subsequently stood corrected when President of the GTU, clarified that they did possess minutes just not the ones that spoke to discussions on financial matters as claimed by the Education Ministry.

Senior Counsel, Roysdale Forde who represents the interests of the Guyana Trade Union Congress (GTUC) further clarified that “these documents are critical for the resolution of the issues” and that salary increases accompanying the Chief Education Officer’s affidavit had been unilaterally imposed and goes directly to the legality and justification of the strike. He said that would logically follow on the question of “whether teachers can and ought to be paid for the period when they are on strike.”

Outside the courtroom, Nandlall lamented the frivolity of Wade’s application

“First of all, we must get the facts straight. Mr Darren Wade brought us here to Court in the most ridiculous application, seeking orders that could not be granted, orders that cannot be granted, orders that were improperly claimed and the whole application was misconceived from top to bottom. The court was very kind, and very, very generous to him, the court granted him leave to withdraw and discontinue the proceeding,” Nandlall told reporters.

As argued before, Nandlall said the State should not be made to produce documents that are already in the possession of the Union, pointing out that the Union’s President, Dr. Mark Lyte, when called upon in the Court today acknowledged that GTU has in its possession records of meetings held between the two sides.

“Now, there is a conflict, Mr Chief Education Officer, has alleged a particular narrative in his affidavit. The GTU is alleging a different narrative in their affidavit. So, you have two affidavits that are conflicting. In my view, and in my learning of the law, the conventional, and the legally permissible thing to do in those circumstances is that you put the two witnesses in the witness box and you cross examine them, based on what they have said under oath in an effort to reconcile the differences. A different method was chosen here today. The respondent, who has nothing to provide in the case, has been ordered to produce minutes, which we will do. But the applicant has moved this court, the applicant is asking the court for reliefs, the application has to prove its case,” the Attorney General argued

Nandlall had nevertheless given the Court an undertaking that he would provide the documents to the GTU’s lawyer by midnight Tuesday.

The parties are to return to court on Wednesday for the substantive matter on whether striking teachers should be paid, whether the government was right to stop deducting and remitting union dues and if there was collective bargaining on salaries.

---

• Anil Nandlall, Attorney General, Attorney-at-Law, Darren Wade, High Court, S.C.

---