Dear Editor,
Strike is a function of modern trade unions, mostly used as a last resort when issues submitted as grievances are not favourably considered by management. In essence, unions have a right to collectively withdraw their labour rather than to accept their employer’s offer, provided it is done within the confines of any existing legislation or provisions within the Collective Labour Agreement.
But, what contribution does a strike make in resolving a dispute? Depending on the type of business a strike can have devastating effects on an employers’ revenue and at the same time deprive workers of earnings, thus hurting both sides economically. Soon it becomes clear that it is much less painful to agree, even if they do have to move considerably closer to the terms proposed by the other side.
However, experience has shown that negotiations are still steeped in the traditional conflict approach, where militancy is seen as a form of commitment and strikes are used to enforce demands irrespective of the consequences to both parties.
The proliferation of strikes in the sugar industry is an example of this conflict approach, but given the precarious financial position of GuySuCo, this approach is becoming too costly. That apart, how can you justify a strike that lasts for five days in pursuance of an additional two days incentive or a two per cent increase in wages? Mathematically, it makes little sense from an individual worker’s perspective, but collectively with a work force of twenty thousand workers, it could mean the difference between survival and bankruptcy through substantial loss in revenue to the company. This is not discounting the social and actual costs of disruption to affiliated businesses, families, essential services and revenue to the state.
The question, therefore is, should the unions continue with this type of approach or adopt a new approach where, rather than using coercion, discussions are focused on objective criteria in assessing potential solutions through persuasion, co-operation and information-sharing. This approach is called mutual-gains bargaining, where standards of fairness, efficiency and productivity are used to arrive at win-win solutions, rather than enforcement of demands through coercion.
The survival of the sugar industry depends on this type of commitment from all stakeholders, but unfortunately conflict had already manifested itself with the first strike.
Yours faithfully,
D Sookdeo
