It is a contretemps that has been repeated much too often: a trade union at odds with the government. Although professing themselves to be pro-labour, successive governments have been guilty of behaving badly in their interactions with trade unions. Their modus operandi has been to blatantly ignore unions and unilaterally assign pay increases to workers, particularly those in the public service and teachers.
Last week, General Secretary of the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) Coretta McDonald expressed umbrage at what appeared to be signs that the government was once again headed in the direction of awarding an increase to teachers, sans negotiations with the union. In this instance, talks had already started with the Ministry of Education, the goal of the GTU being a multi-year agreement, the last one having been signed in 2018. The successful completion of this, one imagines, would offer teachers some peace of mind.
It would appear that the union managed to upset the powers that be at the ministry in May, when it staged a protest calling for this agreement on a day when talks were scheduled to continue. Moreover, Ms McDonald, aside from being the GTU General Secretary, is a prominent member of the opposition, APNU+AFC and a sitting Member of Parliament. She has been accused in the past of sacrificing teachers’ welfare at the altar of political expediency and that charge was made again following the protest. The Ministry of Education, in a pithy statement following the protest, described it as “opportunistic and disingenuous”. Since then, it seems, things have fallen apart.
Last Wednesday, President Irfaan Ali entered the fray, stating, in response to a question about the negotiations with the GTU, that he would be speaking directly to teachers. Just how the President intends to accomplish this feat has not been revealed. What is immediately obvious, however, is that unless he travels to each of the approximately 1,000 public educational institutions, some teachers will not be reached. Mass meetings in the ten regions might be the way envisioned, but these could prove chaotic.
Furthermore, to the discerning eye, this behind-the-scenes-but-not-really manoeuvre in effect mirrors the accusation thrown at Ms McDonald. Political expediency and self aggrandisement are surely two sides of the same coin.
This is not the first time a head of state has become involved in union/employer negotiations. After all, when the government is the employer, the very last buck stops with the person at the helm. One recalls 2018 when then president David Granger intervened to prevent teachers from taking strike action as they had threatened. It was following that intervention that the Ministry of Education and the GTU signed a two-year agreement, retroactive to 2016. However, the very next year, the same president arbitrarily announced salary hikes for public servants, effectively kicking the Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) to the curb. The same thing had transpired in 2015. In 2011, then president Bharrat Jagdeo had also announced pay hikes for public servants without negotiating with the GPSU, having done the same in 2010, 2009 and 2008. One could go on, but the point has been made.
Meanwhile, as Ms McDonald pointed out last week, teachers are quite likely to ask for exactly what the GTU has already requested on their behalf or perhaps even more. If the government truly is in a position to meet teachers’ needs then there is absolutely no need for any posturing. It should simply acquiesce to the union’s requests. However, it is not that simple.
The talks between unions and employers are called negotiations for a reason. Unions are mandated to ask for the maximum of what their workers require. They expect to get less, but by starting high they can perhaps reach a decent medium. Employers, it would seem, are usually prepared to offer just the minimum; therefore they negotiate.
When an employer bypasses the workers’ representative, as has been done here ad nauseam, that employer is signalling a lack of respect for the rights of workers to organise, negotiate and conclude collective bargaining agreements, to protect their interests by taking industrial action and to have access to an impartial dispute settlement (arbitration) if talks breakdown or reach an impassable stalemate. These are all rights that are guaranteed to unionised workers and should not be trifled with.
In most places, Guyana included, owing mostly to rhetoric peddled by governments, teachers tend to be viewed as different or apart from other unionised employees. More is expected from them and very often less is given in return. Teachers become unpopular, not just with the government, but also with the population, when they threaten to or take industrial action. The government’s argument is usually that if whatever action teachers decide on takes them out of the classroom, then they are denying children their right to education. The action would also affect parents, who might be unable to go to work if their children are not in school, hence the unpopularity. That being said, however, it has to be noted that none of this takes into account the teachers’ rights. If the government is invested in providing quality education for the nation’s children, then teachers’ working conditions and pay have to be at the very least, adequate. That has not been the case in the public education sector in this country for decades, if ever.
It is past time for teachers to receive what they are worth as the educators, sub-parents, counsellors, and sitters of the children of this nation. A government that really cares should be able to look beyond the pettiness of who did what and not punish an entire sector for the faults it claims lie with the leadership. After all, ordinary people do this every day where the government is concerned.
