The main sugar Union, GAWU today defended industrial action on Tuesday in the face of charges by GuySuCo on Wednesday that it had coerced Uitvlugt sugar estate workers to strike in the ongoing protest action over the planned closure of the Wales estate.
The GAWU release follows:
The Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc. (GuySuCo) issued a statement released by the Government Information Agency (GINA) on (Wednesday) February 24, 2016 which, ONCE AGAIN, SOUGHT to show the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) in a bad light. GuySuCo’s statement related to a union/worker activity that took place at Uitvlugt last (Tuesday) February 23 ,2016 and which was in keeping with a decision by the Union’s General Council team taken on January 30, 2016.
That decision specifically called for a day of protest (strike) action by local Union leaders, activists, and rank and file (members) to press GuySuCo to engage the Union in Collective Bargaining.
It is to be recalled that in 2015 (last year) workers in the industry were subjected to an imposition of a 2.72 days’ API payment which is expected to be paid in March this year (2016) and which is unjust. It is also recalled that the Corporation, last year, in refusing to enter into Collective Bargaining disrespected Clause 5 (2) (1) of the Recognition and the Avoidance and Settlement of Disputes Agreement subsisting between the Union and the Corporation; Section 23 (1) of the Trade Union Recognition Act (TURA); and even ignored Article 147 of the Guyana Constitution and thus the workers’ claim for a wage-rise was deliberated upon between the Corporation and the Union.
Clearly, this anti-worker and anti-Union thrust emerging over recent months have undermined trust in the Corporation to do the right and the lawful things, to safeguard and secure workers’ interests; and to promote industrial democracy. GuySuCo’s Statement of February 24, 2016 only serves to justify such a view. In these circumstances, workers are driven to take responsible and militant actions in defence of their interests and rights and in support of their demands.
GAWU also wishes to remind the relevant GuySuCo authorities that it is a long-established practice for Union personnel to engage its membership in legitimate decisions taken by the Union. For GuySuCo to impute improper conduct of a Union Field Officer to do such work is, in our view, an attempt to roll-back a zealously guarded practice of Trade Unionism. The GAWU, in principle, condemns such an attempt.
The GAWU also takes this opportunity to correct the misrepresentation in GuySuCo’s statement which sought to convey the impression that a previous field officer of GAWU was disengaged by the Union on the grounds that he failed to get workers to take strike action. While we are not surprised by such inaccuracies by the new few at the top of GuySuCo, we simply wish to point out emphatically that this statement has no basis in fact.
The GAWU is also somewhat amused by the absurdity contained in GuySuCo’s February 24, 2016 Release. For instance, we read that GAWU reps would be removed if they failed to get workers to strike. Then, it was implied that the strike-call at Uitvlugt was not successfully responded to, but to date we have not heard whether the Union reps have been removed. GuySuCo also stated: ‘Similarly the workers were told if they don’t support the strike they would not be afforded representation by the Union in the future’. The Union’s rich and proud history should easily debunk such mischievous assertions.
But what is more painful is to experience the low levels GuySuCo’s leadership has fallen to and low dodges it has resorted to as reflected in the Statement. This condition harks back to the colonial times, not a pleasant feeling in this year when the nation is poised to mark its 50th Freedom Anniversary. The condition also begs the question: Is GuySuCo, as presently led, up to the task of turning the industry around? The February 24, 2016 Statement certainly detracts from any assurance that it can.
The GAWU thinks that it is necessary to repeat that it is committed to protecting the rights and interests of its members. With our Collective leadership and through democratic deliberations, we intend to stand firm in taking decisions and adopting various measures in “sync with the best interest of the workers and the industry”.
