Dear Editor,
The letter captioned ‘GAWU supports dismissed shop steward’ that was carried in SN’s December 16 edition has again demonstrated the sugar company’s scant regard for enlightened, prudent and open labour relations practices.
I do not wish to comment on either the merit or demerit of Dharamdeo Brijwalla’s dismissal, but on the company’s stance of refusing to acquiesce to GAWU’s request to refer the matter to the next stage of the grievance procedure, which is arbitration.
It seems that the collective labour contract between the company and union requires mutual consent by both parties to proceed to arbitration. This is an obvious defect in this contract, because here is the union after the Chief Labour Officer Charles Ogle had declared a “deadlock” in the dispute at hand, expressing itself willing to proceed to arbitration, but the company as per its letter dated December 6, 2016 is refusing to have the said dispute “considered at arbitration”.
Editor, one could only assume that the company would have conducted the required due diligence and critical reviews with respect to the facts and circumstances of the case before it took the decision to dismiss Brijwalla, so why is it refusing to defend its decision at arbitration if it is confident that its decision could be scrutinized at this proceeding?
Was it that Brijwalla was dismissed without due process being followed, and for the company to avoid any exposure or embarrassment it bluntly refuses to go along with the union’s choice?
The letter in your newspaper stated that at the meeting on September 20, 2016 Mr Ogle, after presentations by the union and company, recommended that the latter review its decision. It is obvious that Ogle’s recommendation was informed by what was presented to him by both parties, and he must have recognised that the company’s decision was defective.
Editor, it is highly improper for the company to dismiss an employee, who was unionized for that matter, and hide behind a defective collective labour contract, rather than go the full length to defend its decision. Would GuySuCo have refused to defend its decision in court if Brijwalla had had recourse to the law?
Yours faithfully,
Selwyn Narinedatt
