National Workers’ Union in dispute with VINLEC

The National Workers’ Movement (NWM) is now engaged in a dispute with this country’s sole electricity company, St Vincent and the Grenadines Electricity Services (VINLEC).

At a press conference on Tuesday, General Secretary of the Union Noel Jackson, explained that since 2005, VINLEC has been in negotiations with the NWM, and to date they have been unable to come to a settlement.{{more}}

Jackson said that the Union has been negotiating with VINLEC for a revised collective agreement but they have been experiencing difficulties with some aspects of the agreement, mainly Clause 8 Section 1 and Section 4 of the Collective Agreement which focus on the issues of retirement, severance pay and redundancy.

Jackson said the union is now seeking the intervention of the Minister of Labour. “We have (written to) the Minister of Labour asking her for her immediate intervention on the issue for the second time… .

The last time we did not declare a dispute, we sought to peacefully have the matter discussed hoping that it would have been settled but we hope that they move on the issue expeditiously because we have wasted a lot of time.”

Jackson explained that the Attorney General had been asked to give an opinion on the issues and while she gave a detailed opinion about the matter, the company has dismissed it even though they had said during the negotiations that whatever the ruling was given by the Attorney General, they would be prepared to abide by that.

One of the contentious issues is Clause 8 of Section 1 in the Memorandum of Agreement which states, “The normal retirement age would be 60 years old but retirement at any earlier age maybe allowed at the employees discretion or may be directed by the employer and shall count as normal retirement.”

Explaining, Jackson said that it should count as normal retirement if the company sent home the employee earlier than the age of 60. He said making a worker redundant and sending a worker on early retirement were two completely different things.

The two other issues relate to severance pay and redundancy.

Jackson said while the Attorney General ruled in favour of VINLEC with Section 4 B of the agreement which dealt with severance pay because there was an error with the draft of that sub-section, VINLEC’s position where the worker’s contribution was to be matched against the worker’s severance was unfair.

He clarified, “My contribution in the pension is what you have been deducting from my salary or wages every month or every fortnight and putting it into the pension.

So how can you then calculate my severance for the years that I work and then match it with money that includes my personal contribution, it is not right. The Attorney General has ruled contrary to the position on this one, but we are continuing to hold the position that you can’t take a worker’s personal contribution and match it against the worker’s severance.”

A release from VINLEC dated June 13 stated that the company was aware that the NWM had formally declared a dispute.

The company pledged to work with all parties involved to have the matter resolved, and said “The company believes that disputes can be resolved through dialogue. We are confident that through further discussion, the issue can be resolved in a way that would be mutually beneficially to all.”