Attorney: Court judgements impacting business

Ali said Industrial Court appointments should not always be left to be made by the political directorate and the influence of trade unions.

Ali also said that “Contract labour has all but been abolished in Trinidad and Tobago because of decisions of the Industrial Court.

He said that in the case of a contract employee, if his contract expires and the employer renews that contract then the contract worker automatically becomes an employee of the company.

Ali added that he does not foresee any reform of the Industrial Act because of “judicial activism,” adding that the impact of Industrial Court judgements on business is not good.

During the question and answer session, businessman Frank Mouttet said the level of productivity in this country is shameful and blamed the Industrial Court for this situation.

He said he would advise Sandals not to bring its proposed resort to this country because “you can’t fire anybody.” He said he had employees “lined up to be fired” for various reasons but was worried that he might be found to have dismissed the workers wrongfully and the minimum fine imposed by the Industrial Court for wrongful dismissal is $75,000.

He charged that the Industrial Court is harsh and oppressive in its judgements against employers, suggesting, to much laughter from the audience, that the judges of the court must have been brought up in Siberia under Joseph Stalin. “When will this madness stop?” he asked. “The country is going down the tubes!” He said, again to much laughter, that “there is no ‘tripartite’ there is ‘onepartite.’ Asked to respond to Mouttet’s charges, Industrial Court judge, Patrick Rabathaly, who earlier delivered a feature address setting out the reasons for the existence of the court and reviewing some major past judgements, said employers can dismiss workers but, if they do so, they must have the evidence to support their decision. He said if they are brave enough to fire a worker then they must have the evidence to come to the Industrial Court and defend their action.

Ali said, “We can do our best to reduce disputes but we will never eliminate disputes because capital and labour will always be in conflict.” He said the trade union movement’s ability to get access to the Industrial Court and get large settlements is a business and the trade union movement is highly organised. He said they discuss ways of improving the terms and conditions of their members and have conferences locally where union federations comprising several unions meet to share ideas and have further discussion.

He added that after this they attend international conferences and absorb “first world” ideas on worker compensation and benefits and then come back home and put them into effect.

He said “business is nowhere near as organised as the trade union movement” and added that employers needed to develop something that would allow them to meet the trade unions across the table on an equal footing.

Rabathaly said that the decisions of the Industrial Court have been recognised by superior courts as being sound and both sides won and lost at the court in equal measure, “so I don’t know where harsh and oppressive comes in, really.” He added that the judgements of the court do not bear out any accusation that the court is anti-business. He said the trade unions make the same accusation as well, that the court is anti-union.