A strike by workers has caused a total shutdown at the La Bonne Intention (LBI) sugar estate and this action has since spread to the estate at Enmore where workers downed tools two days ago over what they call the “wrongful dismissal” of a colleague.
The LBI estate has suffered severely since it is now more than seven days since the workers took strike action after their union shop steward was dismissed by the Guyana Sugar Corporation (Guysuco). The corporation has since contended that the dismissed employee, Khemraj Singh did not comply with the grievance procedure.
However neither the company nor the union representing the majority of workers, the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), has gone public over the strike action.
When contacted yesterday by this newspaper, GAWU Grievance Officer Derek Thakur told Stabroek News that one of its representatives who is also a worker at the sugar company, Singh, was dismissed on February 27 and the reason given by the company was “violation of the grievance procedure by instigating, organizing and mobilizing a two-day strike action on February 12 and 13.”
According to Thakur, a factory employee, Rambarran, on February 8 had declined to undertake repairs on a hole on a boiler because the job required that he climb over 12 feet.
He said after Rambarran refused, the factory manager referred him to a medex who concluded that the man was suffering from a height phobia. And because of this Rambarran was not given work for that day. His fellow workers felt that the man had declined the task for valid safety reasons and was therefore unjustifiably denied work.
Thakur told Stabroek News that the workers felt too that Rambarran should have been paid for that day and so shop steward Singh decided that he would take the matter up with management.
Management, he said, decided to meet with Singh but did not consent to pay Rambarran for the day he was denied work and so Singh reported management’s decision to the workers.
Thakur said after the workers were informed, they decided that they would take strike action and according to him, Singh was singled out by the company’s management and then dismissed.
GAWU’s Grievance Officer added too that Chief Labour Officer (CLO) Mohammed Akeel was asked to meet with the parties involved and according to him Akeel found no evidence that Singh organized and instigated the strike action. He said that Akeel also recommended that Guysuco review its decision. He said the union expected a response from the company but none was forthcoming up to late yesterday.
Contacted for a comment yesterday, Guysuco Human Resources Director, Jairam Petam told Stabroek News that the company was deliberating on the matter but so far its decision to dismiss Singh stands.
Petam confirmed most of the circumstances surrounding Singh’s dismissal but noted that when Singh indicated to management the workers’ intention to strike, he was reminded at that time that he should comply with the grievance procedure.
According to Petam, Singh insisted that workers would proceed on two days strike action and again he was reminded to adhere to regulations.
A disciplinary hearing was held for Singh on February 27, the Guysuco executive said, and he was asked to show reason why he should not be disciplined.
He noted too that the corporation deemed the incident as one that violated the grievance procedure and it expected Singh to be experienced enough in his dealing with such matters since he has represented workers for over five years.
But Petam contended that the Chief Labour Officer Akeel said one thing during a meeting with the Guysuco labour officers and then shared a different position in a meeting which involved all the parties. Stabroek News attempted to contact Akeel yesterday for a comment but failed.
According to Petam, during the meeting with Guysuco labour officers, Akeel held that the company’s decision to dismiss one of its workers was in good order.
“But on March 6 when he met with the company and the union together, Akeel felt that the decision was wrong and advised that it should be varied,” Petam said .
Petam said the CLO was then asked to explain in what form the decision should be varied, and “that’s when he said that the variation should be a re-instatement of Singh”.
Petam said Akeel reasoned too that the company could not take that kind of action against a union representative who calls a strike.
“But the company is adamant that it could proceed to discipline any one of its employees if they do not comply with due procedure and Singh did not comply with the grievance procedure and so he was disciplined,” Petam insisted.
Up to yesterday afternoon the situation remained the same and work on the LBI estate was completely suspended while at Enmore work was being done but on a reduced scale.
Guysuco can ill-afford strike action since every day of production counts in the face of a marked reduction in the price of sugar from Guyana and other African, Caribbean and Pacific States, sold to the European Union.
