-union seeking 20% across-the-board before talks on timeframe for negotiations
By Abigail Headley
With a third session set for Monday, the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) yesterday traded accusations over two conciliation meetings this week aimed at resolving the ongoing strike by educators for collective bargaining.
The union has accused the ministry of showing no interest in considering its proposals, while the ministry has condemned the union’s actions as a breach of agreement and a display of bad faith.
Early yesterday morning, the GTU issued a press release on its Facebook (FB) page where it noted that it had presented a detailed proposal outlining the conditions for resuming duties and commencing conciliation for determining the period for which negotiations are to be taken. The proposal included demands such as an interim 20% across-the-board payment, recusal of the Minister of Labour from the negotiation process, and establishment of an arbitration tribunal if negotiations fail.
Further, the union expressed disappointment and concern that the Ministry of Education had not shown interest in negotiating a collective labour agreement or resolving the ongoing strike.
“Despite the GTU’s efforts to reach a reasonable compromise, the MoE has remained steadfast in their refusal to negotiate a collective labour agreement for the period 2019-2023, which is the core grievance prompting the strike,” the release said.
The Ministry of Educa-tion yesterday responded to the GTU’s release by convening a press conference, where Minister of Education Priya Manickchand condemned the union for violating what she said was a confidentiality agreement. According to Manickchand, the agreement by both parties, was intended to keep the contents of the conciliation meetings private.
“Both parties were asked to keep the contents of these ongoing meetings confidential to maintain trust among the parties as well as to show good faith in the conciliation pro-cess,” the minister stated.
However, some of these details were provided by the Chief Education Officer (CEO) Saddam Hussain to the Guyana Times whose story appear-ed yesterday before the GTU issued its press reease.
On Tuesday, after the second day of conciliation meetings between the Ministry of Education, the Guyana Teachers’ Union, and the Ministry of Labour came to a close, this newspaper reached out to CEO Hussain, but he declined to comment. Later that even-ing, however, a reporter from Guyana Times managed to speak with the CEO, who shared some insights about the conciliation meeting in a news item which appeared in yesterday’s edition.
In engaging the Guyana Times’ reporter, Hussain expressed disappointment that the union’s new demands have changed the tone of the mediation. According to the report, the CEO contended that the proposal put forward to the ministry didn’t align with the purpose of the conciliation process, which was to come to an agreement on the period for paid salary increases for teachers.
During the press conference yesterday, the ministry disputed the union’s claims, stating that the conciliation process was initiated by the MoE to address an impasse in respect of the timeframe for a new multi-year agreement. The ministry also accused the union of presenting new demands not discussed during the first engagement on Monday, which were not aligned with the purpose of the conciliation process.
The ministry also stated that it is now clear that there is no interest on the part of the GTU to engage in conciliation with a view to resolving the issues as provided for in the grievance procedure.
“It is now clear, if it weren’t before, that there is no interest on the part of the GTU to engage in conciliation with a view to resolving these issues as is provided for in the grievance procedure in the 1990 Memorandum of Agreement. Nowhere in the world would it be considered normal for negotiations to happen under duress. The GTU’s insistence that an across the board 20% be paid before any talks can happen is duress. Given the GTU’s many years as a trade union body, they must know that this is unusual, unacceptable, unreasonable and would result in the breakdown in talks.
It is clear then that teachers’ welfare is not the paramount consideration for the Guyana Teachers’ Union,” the MoE stated, adding that teachers are being used as pawns in a much larger, politically directed plot.
Destructive
“This is destructive and sad,” the statement, read by Manickchand said.
The ministry listed key points on the two days of conciliation as follows:
“The parties proceeded to discuss the terms of a resumption agreement. Below is the first draft of these terms:
i. There shall be an end of the strike by teachers and full resumption of work by all teachers within 72 hours.
ii. There shall be no victimization by either party.
iii. There shall be no break in service and the status quo ante shall prevail.
iv. Following the full resumption of work by all teachers, conciliation will commence on the timeframe of the proposal submitted by the GTU.
6. The parties deliberated and agreed on:
i. There shall be an end of the strike by teachers and full resumption of work by all teachers within 48 hours.
ii. There shall be no victimization by either party.
iii. There shall be no break in service and the status quo ante shall prevail.
Still on the table for discussion at this point were:
iv. Following the full resumption of work by all teachers, conciliation will commence on the timeframe of the proposal submitted by the GTU.
v. The above terms shall be subject to the determination of proceedings before the Court by courts of competent jurisdiction.
The meeting of Monday 13th May, 2024 ended without resolution to numbers iv and v as stated above. The Union stated that they were tired and asked that the meeting be adjourned to Tuesday 14th May, 2024 at 10:30am for determination on iv and v as stated above.
7. Both parties were asked to keep the contents of these ongoing meetings confidential to maintain trust among the parties as well as to show good faith in the conciliation process. The Ministry was optimistic that there would be a signed resumption agreement and that conciliation would commence.
8. On Tuesday 14th May, 2024 both parties were in attendance and the CLO reconvened the meeting. Discussions commenced on the options which were put on the table for number iv. Both parties narrowed it down to two options and the Ministry was hopeful that the agreement would be signed the said day.
9. After a day and a half of negotiations, suddenly the GTU then presented a two-page document dated 13th May, 2024 which included a list of demands to be met before the resumption agreement could be signed. The Ministry was shocked.
10. Among the list of demands were, inter alia:
(a) The Ministry shall make an interim 20% across-the-board payment immediately BEFORE any conciliation regarding timeframe can commence.
(b) That the Minister of Labour be requested to recuse himself from the negotiation process.
(c) That full resumption of duties shall occur and conciliation begin only after these conditions are met.
11. The meeting was adjourned with the next meeting date set for Monday 20th May, 2024 at 1pm”.
Last night, the GTU fired back. It said in a release that Manickchand’s claim of a breach of confidentiality at the Monday and Tuesday meetings are “completely baseless and mere diversionary tactics”. The GTU said that it was its responsibility to keep members apprised of what was happening
“It is important to note that no confidentiality agreement or terms of reference were ever signed for a conciliation process. The conciliation has not even started”, the union declared. It rejected the minister’s charge that political motives were behind the strike.
“We are a labour union exercising our constitutional rights to demand better working conditions for teachers and to negotiate on behalf of our teachers – not a political party. These claims are unfounded attempts to undermine our cause”, the GTU said.
The union further argued that if the government was fully prepared to compromise at conciliation, “they should demonstrate that by returning the negotiating table without preconditions to substantively address the GTU’s core demands…”
It added that as an oil-producing country, Guyana has a “moral obligation to invest more resources into education and teachers’ welfare to build the human capacity necessary for sustainable development”.
On Tuesday, the GTU head revealed that the union is prepared to make a compromise on the years to be discussed for an increase in teachers’ salaries, with specific mention to the 2021-2023 time period.
When asked by this newspaper during the press conference yesterday whether or not the MOE would be willing to compromise on its position to only negotiate salary increases from 2024 onwards, Manickchand stated that the MoE has a fixed position on negotiating salary increases starting from 2024. She added that she believes that the union’s demand for salary increases from 2019-2023 is unrealistic and not based on the country’s economic situation.
The Minister also hinted that the union’s decision-making may be influenced by the country’s newfound oil wealth but did not elaborate further. Manickchand reassured teachers that they will be treated fairly and equitably, and that the current salary increases are just the beginning of what is to come.
The next meeting between the two parties is scheduled for Monday, May 20 at 1pm.
