Dear Editor,

The current bauxite workers’ struggle against the Bauxite Company Guyana Inc (BGCI) has been the result of the management’s refusal to pay an increase. The management also threatened to close down the mines to justify that they cannot pay any increase. The workers remained steadfast in their demands for a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. As negotiations continued and talks broke down the demands were taken to the streets via strike action on November 22. On December 11, BCGI announced they would impose a pay increase of 6.5 per cent. The increase only came about because the workers took to the streets. It wasn’t given because the employer cared about the workers, but because workers stood their ground in their demand for a fair day’s pay. This demonstrates what can be possible when workers stand together steadfastly. Other recent percentage increases have seen sugar receiving three, BOSAI 4.5 and public service six.

However, the imposition of 6.5 per cent, when in the first instance BCGI said it could not pay one per cent indicates that had BCGI negotiated in good faith by making information available, there would not have been a strike and the union would have been able to justify its demand for a ten per cent increase. In a time-worn tactic of divide and rule the company has resorted to dismissing all union leaders elected by the workers, and said it would not recognise the union of the workers’ choice. These are anti-trade union activities that violate fundamental rights and the rule of law, and must not be condoned.

The struggle must therefore continue for respect for workers’ right to freedom of association as outlined in the ILO Convention, Freedom of Association No. 87 and protected in the Trade Union Recognition Act, Chapter 98:07, 2 (2) which specifically allows bauxite worker to join a union of their choice. No employer, therefore, has the right to give any employee a form to revoke his membership of the union. It is against the law. This law clearly states at Offences of Employer, Section 26 (2) (a) “an employer shall not make the employment of a worker subject to the condition that he shall or shall not become a member,”  of a union.

There has to be respect for recognition. Cap. 98:07, Section 22 (1) Issue and Content of Certificates clearly stipulates that “The Board shall issue a certificate under its seal to the union and to the employer in every case in which it certifies a trade union as a recognised majority union.”  This certificate is issued to both BCGI and GB&GWU and as such the GB&GWU is the legally recognised bargaining unit on the workers’ behalf and the BCGI must honour it. Any act or refusal therefore by BCGI to deal with the union of the workers’ choice is a violation of the law.

The employer’s letters of suspension and dismissal given to workers who went on strike contravenes time-honoured principles and laws. The moment the strike commenced the contractual arrangement between the employer and employee is suspended and no worker who is not on the job shall be disciplined for any purpose. Cap. 98: 07, Section 26 Offences by employer subsection (1) (a) says “No employee shall be dismissed, or have his employment adversely affected, or his position altered by his employer, by reason of the circumstances that the worker is an officer, delegate or member of a trade union.”

Offences by the employer Section 26 (3) of this act says:

“An employer who contravenes any of the provisions of subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of twenty-eight thousand dollars; and the magistrate making the order of conviction shall also order that the worker be reimbursed any wage lost by him and direct that, notwithstanding any rule of law to the contrary, the worker be reinstated in his former position or in a similar position with terms and conditions of employment no less favourable.”

While the company has imposed the 6.5 per cent wage increase it is done in violation of the law. With regard to a new collective agreement with a recognised majority union, Section 28 of the act says, “where a recognised majority union is substituted as a party to a collective labour agreement in accordance with Section 27 (c), the union so substituted as a party to the collective agreement may submit to the employer proposals for the revision of the collective agreement or for a new collective agreement and the parties shall bring into effect, the revised or new collective agreement expeditiously, the collective agreement in force so remaining until a new collective agreement is signed.”

Until such time that the parties agree to a new wage increase the imposition of 6.5 per cent remains illegal and the union has a right to continue pursuing an appropriate wage/salary increase; the return of every employee to the position s/he held prior to the strike; respect for the Laws of Guyana, and; the protection of the right of every worker to freely select the union of his/her choice.

The government has the primary responsibility to ensure that the ILO Convention and the country’s laws are respected by every employer, and if this matter is taken before the ILO, whatever sanction is determined it will be against the Govern-ment of Guyana.

The issues that emerged during this struggle threaten the viability of every trade union in Guyana and the Caricom region. It therefore requires every trade union and every democratic institution that subscribes to the protection of rights to join hands in fighting these transgressions.

The struggle must continue. Solidarity!

Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis