The week we celebrated our 60th year of independence was a telling one. That is because we had a number of developments that reflected the good, the bad and, more worryingly, the ugly as far as our trade unions are concerned.
First, the good.
It was reassuring to see the Amalgamated Workers’ Union agreeing to the four per cent pay rise of the first and long-delayed collective agreement the Government finally sought to engage the unions with after years of silence and delays.
Reassuring because, as unions agree to the proposals, the risk of industrial action (both legal and illegal) in the public sector recedes, which is definitely good news for the citizen. It is also positive to see that at least one union seems to understand the State’s coffers can ill afford major pay increases.
Let’s hope others will follow but, given the initial reaction by fellow union leaders, we shouldn’t hold our breath.
Now to the bad.
It was also reported this week that the PSA and the NUGFW are joining forces in what they see as the need to protect the rights of WASA workers as the Government seems determined to restructure the financially incontinent water authority.
Their move is not surprising, especially as it always feels like the unions see WASA, as well as other public bodies, as a soft target, where they can demand unrealistic terms and conditions for their members irrespective of how badly things are run or the poor service they provide to the very citizens that keep them employed.
The claims are the usual ones–that WASA can be turned around without job losses and that management must take the labour movement’s plans and views into account, not what the Government committee delivered.
The problem is that, as we have seen elsewhere, plans put forward by our unions tend to be unrealistic and fail to address critical issues such as staff performance and productivity. A turnaround plan cannot start from the premise that every job is guaranteed and that the payroll should be left intact, as we know those are recipes for disaster.
Instead, the unions representing WASA staff should be seeking to engage with the Government to improve the current plans but without pre-conditions, such as no job losses.
There’s hope for agreement, though, as long as the unions truly engage with the plans without prejudice and offer genuinely realistic (and bound to be painful) alternatives to the plans in place.
Above all, they must remain engaged and watch their language– inflammatory comments are hardly helpful in industrial relations matters. And, as President Paula-Mae Weekes highlighted in her independence message, we must move away from a culture of vitriol and aggression–both physical and verbal–for the sake of T&T’s future.
In fact, both the Prime Minister, Dr Keith Rowley, and the JTUM leader, Ancel Roget Jr, should take heed of the President’s message.
Following what looks like an ill-advised Facebook post suggesting some union leaders are supporting some of the demonstrations by scrap iron dealers unhappy with the Government ban on exports, Mr Roget let it rip, claiming Dr Rowley’s statement included falsehoods and that he was considering legal action as the Prime Minister’s comments, he alleged, tarnished his reputation.
That is a tad rich given Mr Roget’s usual taste for hyperbole and regular questioning of people’s character. So much so that he has been successfully taken to court for spreading falsehoods against a then NP Human Resources manager.
And, given the chance to at least apologise for his lies and then pay half the amount awarded by the judge, he stuck to his guns, failed to apologise for his offending lies, and thus was forced to pay the full amount instead.
But the spat also represents a bigger and uglier face of our trade unionism that is highly damaging. The regular aggressive language used by union leaders and the endless threats–some bordering on the criminal–do nothing for a civil and positive engagement between employers and the unions, where they are recognised.
And they don’t even spare each other.
The news of AWU’s agreement with the Government’s Chief Personnel Officer was still fairly fresh when other trade union leaders started the attacks on AWU’s leader, Michael Prentice, and his colleagues, labelling them as traitors for what they see as a betrayal of the labour movement.
As Mr Prentice stated to this newspaper, “in less than a day, some of my colleagues would have put on the WhatsApp chat that I am a PNM general council member. It gets ugly, it gets dirty, it is something that lots of us in this fraternity would have liked not to happen”.
Absolutely. And, in reality, most in society would like this kind of ugly behaviour to stop altogether.
The very founding principles of our nation are based on the need to be united in order for us to achieve greater things.
That is, indeed, usually the case. But to be united for the wrong reasons achieves nothing positive, quite the opposite. Instead of calling those who disagree with you all sorts of names, union leaders should be having a frank, honest and, above all, civil debate about what the country needs in terms of reforms and change if they really believe in a prosperous nation and a fairer society.
Or focus on real and at times truly scary matters affecting all, such as violent crime, domestic violence and abuse, education and many other issues that are at the centre of our problems right now and will continue to threaten our future if nothing is done about them.
The President spoke of hurt in T&T. And she is right.
The bad and the downright ugly have no place in our country if we are to stop hurting. And that includes the workplace and the labour movement.
