Dear Editor,

Reference is made to Labour Minister, Manzoor Nadir’s letter ‘The government has no axe to grind with the trade union movement’ (SN, June 9). The Minister claims my statement that, “the Government is now working with employers to undermine the trade union movement in Guyana,” is “sweeping.” This is not a “sweeping” statement and I stand by it. First, showing a table of unions securing recognition does not disprove my statement. In fact, recognition is not within the portfolio of the Minister. Recognition comes under the jurisdiction of the Trade Union Recognition and Certification Board, a body that is constitutionally independent of the Ministry of Labour and is expected to act in accordance with the constitution. The distinction must be made clear: the Ministry of Labour, and the Trade Union Recognition and Certification Board are two separate and distinct bodies, the latter of which constitutionally the Minister should have no control over.

Secondly, the Government of Guyana, as a principal employer also manages the affairs of the state, and the Ministry of Labour that is legally responsible for attending to labour issues has and is engaging in acts to “undermine the trade union movement.”  Some instances are:

1   the termination of the check-off system to the Guyana Public Service Union;

2.   refusing to respect the right to collective bargaining that sees the yearly imposition of wages/ salaries to public servants;

3.  labour violations against public servants such as the cases of Clarence Chue/customs officers, Supreme Court marshals/Registry staff, Genevieve Whyte-Nedd, and arbitrary firing of customs officers on charges that they failed polygraph tests;

4. the refusal to implement in its entirety the Public Service 1999 Armstrong Award;

5. the  refusal to settle the seven-month old impasse between the Bauxite Company of Guyana Inc (BCGI) and the Guyana Bauxite and General Workers Union (GB&GWU) – of which the Govern-ment of Guyana is shareholding partner in BCGI – in as much as the Minister and Chief Labour Officer have publicly acknowledged their recognition of the union as the legal representative of workers, and the Prime Minister in his June 3 parliamentary presentation said “We agree that the company has no right to de-recognise the union”;

6.  the refusal of the Ministry of Labour to conciliate in grievances brought before it by the GB&GWU on matters pertaining to the May 2009 strike at BCGI;

7. the refusal of the government to disburse workers’ tax dollars to the Guyana Trade Union Congress and the Critchlow Labour College in as much as the money was passed into law via the National Budget.

Undermining organized labour is not only about the named specific incidents but is also about operating in an environment where the tone being set for representation and negotiation is hostile. This includes acts of government aggression, and fear and tension, so instead of negotiating for what is just and fair, persons are prepared/cajoled to accept whatever employers throw at them. It is also an environment where labour leaders and their unions will suffer if they do not comply with the dictates of government or dare to speak out against the transgressions taking place in society. Labour, which is supposed to be independent, sees government interference to the point where it selects who should be labour’s representatives on state boards and attend International Labour Organisation’s events. When the rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining, two main pillars in trade unionism, are being compromised there can be no sincerity to the claim that the “government has a proud history of supporting and building the trade union movement.”

Unfortunately in an environment where truth and accountability is sadly lacking the Minister can make statements fully aware that they will not be subject to any litmus test or that he will be expected to corroborate with evidence. Hence, he is bold enough to take advantage of the situation. Public officials who take the oath of office to serve the people without fear, favour or ill will are paid by the taxpayers. People expect them to serve their interests with honesty and integrity. As their paymasters they deserve no less. In other societies there would have been mounting pressure on this Minister for his non-adherence to the truth.

Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis