The behaviour of the senior management of the Trinidadian company of Neal & Massy in shutting down Almond Beach Village in the manner that they did is a classic example of the pitfalls that come with “absentee ownership” of a country’s economic structures.
Neal & Massy, the majority owners and senior manager of Almond Beach Village, made a decision to close this major Barbadian hotel without first discussing the matter with the minority shareholders, the workers, the workers’ trade union or even the Government of Barbados.
The People’s Empowerment Party (PEP) denounces Neal & Massy for its failure to consult with the 500-odd workers or their Government and, in particular, for its failure to explore with these parties the various possibilities of keeping the hotel functioning and preserving the precious jobs of the employees. This is, indeed, a graphic example of the ugly, inhumane face of capitalism.
But, perhaps, this generation of Barbadians only have themselves to blame. Previous generations understood very clearly that it was in Barbados’ best interest to avoid “absentee ownership”, and therefore did everything in their power to keep Barbados’ business enterprises, such as the sugar plantations, in Barbadian hands. Indeed, it is this feature of native ownership that historically distinguished Barbados from other Caribbean territories.
But whether major business enterprises are owned by Barbadians or non-Barbadians, they should never be allowed to go out of operation without possible options for saving them being explored.
And this is why, in the PEP’s general election manifesto of 2008, we proposed that business enterprises should be prohibited from major closures or massive jettisoning of employees, without first going through a mandatory exercise of consultation and consideration of alternatives.
Indeed, we advocated the creation of a statutory corporation, to be called the National Redundancies Board, which would oversee such consultations and efforts to save existing enterprises and jobs.
This is how the policy was expressed at page ten of the PEP manifesto:
“A National Redundancies Board will be established to properly scrutinize and investigate impending mass layoffs of workers or impending business closures, with a view to minimizing worker dislocation and finding possible alternative solutions, including the establishment of worker cooperatives to take over the business.”
What we have proposed is not unprecedented, as a few mature countries have utilized institutions that are similar to our proposed “National Redundancies Board” to deal with impending plant closures and mass redundancies. In 1980s France, for example, the country’s Labour Inspectorate retained a power of veto over all redundancies after an inquiry, while in Germany, on any proposed closure, the company’s Works Council must attempt to reconcile employer and employee interests and reach an agreed settlement, with the management having the final decision if all discussions fail.
The current Almond Beach Village debacle confirms the necessity and usefulness of a National Redundancies Board, and we therefore urge the Freundel Stuart administration to establish such an institution as a matter of urgency.