Labour dinosaurs roaming the 21st Century

The three labour stakeholders have myopic views on what needs to be done because they are all seeking their own interests; employers want profits, trade unions want power and control, and the governments want votes. The stakeholders of the labour justice system are like one army practising to march in a 2017 parade but employers are marking time in1846, the labour movement is marking time in 1937 and the government is marking time in 1950.

In all fairness, the mentalities of all involved must be examined through historical lenses. For employers, their exploitative hubris has trickled down from the Masters and Servants Ordinances, the last of which remained in effect until 2012. The 1938 version of this ordinance retained the provisions of its 1846 predecessor which enacted summary dismissal for misconduct without the requirement for proper procedure, unilateral salary deductions and the abusive practice of hiring almost exclusively on month-tomonth contracts.

Today, these issues comprise the bulk of the Industrial Court’s matters because many employers are still ignorant of the fact that workers enjoy a constitutional right to their employment as property, of which they cannot be deprived unless by due process of the law.

Undeniably, it is the prerogative of employers to manage their businesses and organisations as they see fit but this should not be done at the expense of the well-being of workers. Yes, employers engage in union-busting and, yes, many of them have to be forced to negotiate in good faith with trade unions but the bellicose nature of trade unions makes it difficult for anyone to want to work with them.

Diplomacy goes a long way.

Trade unions are the ultimate bulwark for protecting workers from exploitation and unfair labour practices; thus, collective agreements are almost always more beneficial to workers than what the government can offer through employment legislation treating with individual rights.

At the same time, trade unions in Trinidad and Tobago are stuck in the brash mind-set of Uriah Butler; however, in an objective light, all governments from since colonial times have created this monster. The lack of co-operation from employers, and the disrespect of vote-seeking politicians have left unions with little choice but to pound the pavements for the change they seek for their workers. Had it not been for the first major strike in 1919, the first system to settle disputes through the Industrial Court Ordinance 1920 would not have been enacted.

The reality of the court not being constituted eventually led to more unrest until the deadly Butler Riots in 1937 when the colonial powers were forced to enact the Trade Disputes (Arbitration and Inquiry) Ordinance 1938.

With little success from that ordinance, over 250 strikes in the early 1960s saw Dr Eric Williams force the Industrial Stabilisation Act through Parliament in the midst of a state of emergency in 1965. And finally, industrial unrest instigated by the black power movement from 1968 onwards resulted in the Industrial Relations Act also being rushed through Parliament during a state of emergency in 1972.

What this shows is that without the labour movement, the labour system we have today may not have existed; however, trade unions must also understand that in contemporary Trinbago, shutting down immigration offices, hospitals and public transportation makes them enemies of the people.

While I loathe the lack of diplomacy in the way trade unions handle disputes and government corruption, wastage and disrespect will foster and perpetuate the constant struggle of workers and the animosity of the labour movement. It is not that the Trinidad and Tobago governments cannot do anything; it is that they won’t do anything because as the country’s biggest exploiter of workers, any modernisation of our labour system will affect the corrupt hiring and firing practices that prevail at every level of government.

We need to understand that the IRA was constructed on a shaky unconstitutional foundation and therefore must be repealed and replaced.

Then a system for dealing with non-unionised workers must be established alongside comprehensive rights outside of collective agreements. I have added to the many other past recommendations that have come before and I believe that after consultation, we can agree on the way forward for both collective labour and individual employment.

Until then, it is time to make these labour dinosaurs extinct.

J a - mil l e 8 5 @ msn.com