by WADE GIBBONS
PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS should know soon if long-awaited salary increases will be coming their way this year.
There has been no salary agreement between Government and public sector unions since March 31, 2010, and some have publicly construed that development as a “constructive wage freeze”.
But general secretary of the National Union of Public Workers (NUPW), Dennis Clarke, confirmed to the DAILY NATION that a proposal has already been made to Government with respect to salaries and allowances, as well as other areas related to workers’ welfare.
He declined to state the percentage increase which the NUPW was seeking.
Clarke said that last week the union was promised a meeting with Government when the prevailing economic situation would be examined.
He added that the long delay between March 2010 and reaching an updated agreement was due to the watch on the economy and the need to see how it would perform. But he added Government had recently reported an improvement in the country’s economic outlook.
He explained that in view of what occurred with the 1991 economic situation, the union had to be careful with what it was doing. He said the NUPW would be cautious and “extremely reasonable” in its demands.
“We gave them [Government] some time to look at the situation and look at what we were putting on the table . . . But like anything else, we said it was high time that we get to the table and we were promised that we should be at the table shortly,” Clarke said.
The union boss also indicated that the question of a pension being a right for workers was also to be thrashed out with Government.
He noted the last Barbados Labour Party administration had promised the union that this would have been done but had been removed from office before getting around to dealing with the issue.
Clarke also said that the union was “quietly waiting” on Minister of Labour Esther Byer-Suckoo with respect to the long promised Employers Rights legislation.
He said the bill had implications for statutory boards and was critical to ensure due process, especially in disciplinary matters where a situation of “Caesar to Caesar” could arise.
He explained that establishment committees adjudicated these cases and appeals would then go before the board. He noted that board members were part of the establishment committees and hence there could be unfair influence.
