The Tribune

By NATARIO McKENZIE

Tribune Business Reporter

nmckenzie@tribunemedia.net

ATTORNEY Obie Ferguson yesterday said the decision by Labour minister Dion Foulkes to simply refer the dispute involving the Bahamas Customs, Immigration and Allied Workers Union (BCIAWU) to the Industrial Tribunal was "not adequate", telling Tribune Business the matter also needed to be expedited given its sensitivity.

Mr Foulkes announced on Friday that he had referred the labour dispute involving the BCIAWU to the Industrial Tribunal, telling Tribune Business it meant that officers would have to return to their regular duties, ending their nine-day strike.

He told Tribune Business then: "I have referred the matter to the Industrial Tribunal, which means that the strike vote must end and, in 24 hours, they must return to their regular duties. The Industrial Tribunal will now hear both sides of the dispute and make a final determination."

Mr Foulkes said the decision to refer the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal was based on the public interest, mainly the operation of the nation's ports.

He added that if Customs and Immigration officers did not return to work within 24 hours and continued their strike, their actions would be considered illegal. Mr Foulkes said: "It would be an illegal strike, and it would not be sanctioned by the law and there are consequences for that. The consequences would be determined by the Customs Department and the Immigration Department, in accordance with the law."

The BCIAWU has been pressing their demands for the Government to resolve outstanding labor issues. Outstanding issues include health insurance, compensation and what the union has claimed is an illegal shift system.

Mr Ferguson, head of the Trade Union Congress (TUC), the umbrella union covering the BCIAWU, told Tribune Business: "I would have preferred the minister, in making the recommendation, to propose some dates for commencement of the hearing at the Tribunal. Just to refer it there given the urgency is not adequate.

"The minister's duty is to refer a trade dispute to the Tribunal if in his view the public interest is at stake. All of the remarks that I have heard publicly was that the strike had no effect on operations. If that was the case, on what basis could it be said that the public interest is at stake?

"I don't think the public would disagree. We were told repeatedly that everything was going smoothly and there was no impact. All we have been asking for is to have a meeting with the Government to find a resolution to the matter.

"That's a reasonable request. They failed to follow the advice I gave them. I said to them once we meet, whatever we agreed to let us sign off on it to avoid any misunderstanding. That was my initial position to the minister and he agreed. When the time came for putting on paper what we agreed, that is where things fell off."

Mr Ferguson said the union's actions were not motivated by politics. He said: "Politics has nothing to do with what we are doing. We are willing to meet with the minister and put this document to rest.

"My opinion is that they don't want to sign an agreement, and when you don't do that you leave the door open to misinterpretation. The Industrial Tribunal is an avenue towards a resolution, but in that kind of situation you would like for that process to be expedited in view of the sensitivity of the matter.

"If you're re going to refer, it should be expedited. If you go through the Tribunal that is designed for another three to five years unless, of course, the Tribunal or power that be can arranged it in such a way that it can be dealt with as a matter of urgency."