The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Trade union leaders yesterday slammed the Government’s proposal to create a legal impediment to strike polls as “taking the labour movement back to pre-1942”.

Obie Ferguson, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) president, and his National Congress of Trade Unions (NCTU) counterpart, Bernard Evans, were united in their “vehement opposition” to the proposed Industrial Relations Act amendment.

The Christie administration, according to a document seen by Tribune Business, is seeking to insert an entirely new clause 1 (d) into the Act’s section 20, which deals with the supervision of strike polls by the Minister of Labour.

The new clause would require that “a two-thirds majority” of union members must vote in favour of taking a strike poll before it can be held - something they do not have to do currently.

It reads: “Any decision as to whether or not to request a strike poll shall be made at a Special General Meeting of the membership called by the Executive Committee, and shall be decided by a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot.”

The proposed clause effectively creates another step, and a potential impediment/obstacle, in the process trade unions and Bahamian workers must undergo before they can lawfully take industrial action against an employer.

However, Tribune Business can reveal that the Government has already written to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to ascertain whether the proposed Industrial Relations Act change will violate its conventions.

Robert Farquharson, the director of labour, wrote on January 9, 2017: “The Government of the Bahamas, by way of the National Tripartite Council, is reviewing current labour legislation and is in the final stages of making recommendations for amendments to the Industrial Relations Act 1970.

“To this end, the Government of the Bahamas is formally requesting the views of the International Labour Organisation on the proposed amendment to section 20 of the Industrial Relations Act related to the supervision of a strike poll by the Minister.”

The letter, addressed to Claudia Coenjaerts, the ILO Caribbean regional director, added: “The Government wishes to include a provision in the Act whereby before a trade union applies to the Minister to supervise a strike poll, as prescribed in section 20 (3), the union must ensure that a secret ballot is taken by the membership with a two-thirds-support.”

Mr Farquharson revealed that this provision was lifted from the Water and Sewerage Management Union’s constitution, and said: “We are seeking to ascertain if the inclusion of this provision will be in violation of any of the ILO conventions and/or recommendations, particularly Convention 87.”

Should it become law, the amendment would require Bahamian trade unions to ‘take a poll on whether they should have a poll’, with the bar set extremely high for a vote in favour of a strike ballot.

It is unclear what has motivated the Government to push for this, but the move has coincides with recent demands and industrial action threats by public service unions, and their alliance with the ‘We March’ organisers.

The TUC’s Mr Ferguson, though, argued that the proposed amendment amounted to unwarranted, arbitrary and unlawful interference in the internal affairs of Bahamian trade unions.

“It goes against every principle of industrial relations, and certainly goes against the law,” he told Tribune Business. “The effect of the letter [to the ILO] is to take the union movement back to pre-1942.”

Suggesting that the Government was seeking both clarification and permission from the ILO to proceed, Mr Ferguson added: “The constitution of a union is in effect a contract between the union and the worker; its members, not the Minister of Labour.

“One would have thought that the Minister would be aware that in order to amend a constitution, it’s driven by the membership. Because he’s not privy to the contract, he ought to have no powers to interfere with the internal workings of the union. It’s very clear that the internal workings of the union are for the unions.”

Mr Ferguson said the Bahamian trade union movement was poised to make its own representations to the ILO over the issue, arguing that the proposed amendment was a clear violation of its convention 87.

The TUC chief said that under the current law, unions were required to give the Minister of Labour two days’ notice of their intention to hold a strike poll, and the time and place where it will be held.

The Minister’s role is confined to sending someone, usually a Department of Labour representative, to be the designated officer who will certify the poll’s outcome.

“What the Minister’s trying to do is something impossible,” Mr Ferguson told Tribune Business. “If it were to succeed, it would create tremendous problems for all trade unions.

“It doesn’t make any sense at all. We’re definitely going to oppose it, and don’t think it’s in the best interests of working people in this country.”

Mr Ferguson described the Government’s intentions as “mind boggling”, and said they were “ultra vires” and contrary to why the Industrial Relations Act was created.

His sentiments were shared by the NCTU’s Mr Evans, who said both umbrella union bodies “vehemently oppose” the proposed change.

Describing it as an attempt by the Government to take “a line item” in the Water and Sewerage Management Union’s constitution and apply it to all other unions, Mr Evans said the amendment threatened to undermine the good work performed by the National Tripartite Council.

“That is totally opposite the tenets of what we’re trying to do through the Tripartite Council,” Mr Evans told Tribune Business. “We’re trying to further better working relationships, a better way of getting things done, and this will be a throwback to that.”

Confirming that the trade unions were opposing the proposal through the Tripartite Council, the NCTU president added: “It will not fly. It’s not going to pass; I don’t see it passing.”

One group likely in favour of the proposed amendment will be Bahamian employers, given the potential to create another obstacle to lawful industrial action.

Alluding to this, Mr Evans told Tribune Business: “Given the stringent plans and well-designed policies of employers, employing union-busting attorneys and other pressures to do away with unions, we can’t have the Government assisting that by enshrining this in law.”

Mr Farquharson could not be reached for comment before press time.