Comparisons are frequently being made these days with the confrontational mood of organized labour, in the public sector in particular, and the 1991 Democratic Labour Party administration of then Prime Minister Erskine Sandiford when it sought to engage in economic austerity measures, including job cuts and wages freeze.
Now, on this Christmas Eve of 2013, as Barbadians anxiously await expected new initiatives to come from Prime Minister Freundel Stuart next month, perhaps sooner than later, there seems to be an unfortunate conflicting development within the local labour movement involving top leaders of leading trade unions.
This perception was to emerge within 24 hours after Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler’s announcement on Friday, December 13, that at least 3 000 workers in the public sector are scheduled for retrenchment within the first quarter of 2014.
Two examples of differing responses, as reported in the Saturday Sun of December 14, should suffice for now:
First, Sir Roy Trotman, a recognized “icon” of the labour movement, in reacting to Mr Sinckler’s announcement, disclosed that his Barbados Workers’ Union (BWU) had “been alerted to the finance minister’s intentions at a meeting on Wednesday (December 11)”.
At that meeting, according to Sir Roy, the minister “indicated to us that he was being forced by the bleeding of foreign reserves to reach a position where somewhere in the region of 3 000 persons would be laid off . . .”.
In sharp contrast to Sir Roy’s disclosure, Mr Cedric Murrell, president of the Congress of Trade Unions and Staff Associations of Barbados (CTUSAB) – the umbrella grouping of local unions – was openly complaining against the Government’s surprising failure to engage in consultations with the social partners prior to the announced coming job cuts.
Having been a former president of CTUSAB, Sir Roy would appreciate the deep disappointment as expressed by his successor Mr Murrell, the moreso that the “consultative process” is fundamental to the success of the social partners’ mechanism, comprising the Government, labour movement and the private sector.
The fact that the Minister of Finance could have chosen to engage in prior consultation with Sir Roy and his BWU delegation while ignoring to do likewise with CTUSAB becomes all the more puzzling when it is realized, as pointed out by Mr Murrell, that the National Union of Public Workers (NUPW) is the representative body for public sector workers.
Prime Minister Stuart was to subsequently engage in dialogue with a delegation from the NUPW. Rounds of meetings involving the NUPW and the wider CTUSAB are scheduled for the post-Christmas period. But Mr Murrell and his colleagues are focusing on the need for an even wider involvement to also include the private sector as another important pillar of the Social Partnership mechanism to ensure orderly national social and economic development.
Let’s see what develops after the Christmas holidays.