Dear Editor,
I wish to commend you for an excellent and well-composed editorial captioned ‘Wales estate’ that was carried in your January 24 edition. However, I wish ‒ unless it’s refuted by any source ‒ to clarify the part which refers to the “poor handling of the closure of LBI and Diamond.”
The closure of Diamond had two phases: closure of the factory in late 1980s and the closure of cultivation in 2009. I presume the hullaballoo concerns the cultivation’s closure. I will refrain from commenting on the justification for the closure. However, compared to the pending closure of the Wales Estate, it was procedurally better handled. Adequate notice and engagements with the workers’ representatives were done in compliance with the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act. Like closures or downsizing the world over, it was a bitter pill to swallow, and in Guyana where there is a lack of employment opportunities, protests and strikes at such times should not surprise anyone. The cultivation workers at Diamond indeed protested. Ultimately, they were paid their due severance, and many regained employment at Wales estate as agriculture workers.
LBI, on the other hand was a different situation; the factory was closed, but workers were deployed to the Enmore factory and some remained to man the electricity generation system at the LBI factory. Even though there was no severance involved, there was adequate advance notice, again in compliance with the relevant labour law.
Editor, notwithstanding the government’s intimation that Wales estate will be closed at the end of this year, it’s incumbent on either the government or the sugar company to give adequate notice to the workers’ representative organisation of the intention to close the estate, and the reason for taking that decision. The law does not require that the workers’ representatives concur with the decision, although in all circumstances it must be founded on logical, economic and prudent financial grounds. Where there may be a disagreement, there is provision for mediation by the office of the Chief Labour Officer. From all the public pronouncements and releases there was no such notification. The announcement was a shock to all. There is no room, neither in law nor in terms of societal expectations, for such a level of arrogance, where the lives of 1,700 workers are involved.
From all the indications, the closure of Wales estate, notwithstanding what I said in an earlier missive, was badly handled by the government and the company.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Parmanand
