Charles

THE MINISTRY of Labour is threatening to get tough on entities which use the current economic challenge as an excuse to get rid of some workers, while violating the labour laws.

Already, workers and unions have complained that companies are making some posts redundant and sending home workers one week while employing new persons the following week.

This is a clear breach of the law.

"While we note the economic challenge, we have serious complaints about abuse," Labour Minister Pearnel Charles told The Sunday Gleaner.

"There are a number of workers being made redundant and we are not satisfied that their posts have been abolished. There is a feeling that some companies are using the excuse of the financial meltdown to get rid of workers whose posts still exist and whose jobs will soon be filled with others of their choice," Charles added.

probing allegations

He said the labour ministry would be probing these allegations, and where entities are found to have flouted the law efforts, they would be made to seek redress for the workers.

"We feel that worker complaints of exploitation and unfair treatment might be justified, and our investigations will reveal it where it exists," Charles said.

According to Charles, for years unions and employers have been misusing the redundancy clause in the Employment Termination Act.

"In some cases, workers ask for it and there are some settlements which are much higher than the clause requires. The redundancy clause has been violated over and over again to their own comfort."

The Employment Termination and Redundancy Payment Act provides a minimum notice period that should be given to employees whose posts are to be made redundant and outlines the payments to be made to these persons.

The redundancy payment has long been a bone of contention, with several persons arguing that it was unfair to ask companies to shell out money at a time when economics would force them to cut staff.

scoffed at claims

But Charles has scoffed at claims that the redundancy payment is onerous.

"I have never heard of a company having to go to the bank to borrow money for redundancies. The redundancy clause was negotiated between unions and management and agreed upon. Furthermore, the company has 120 days to pay the redundancy. If you cannot pay it, you can make arrangements to do so," Charles told The Sunday Gleaner.

According to Charles, the laws governing redundancy payments were designed as a safety net for workers who have to leave the labour force before they reached retirement age.

"These are workers who have been faithful to your company and you are rewarding them for having done so. To say that people go out of business because of the cost of redundancy is rubbish," Charles declared.

open to discussions

He said, while he was open to discussions on the rules governing redundancy payments, he would not support any measure which would remove this safety net from persons who needed it.

"I am ready and willing for discussions on the redundancy clause between union representatives and local companies and the ministry, but I will not be the one to, unilaterally or in collusion with management, remove the redundancy clause," Charles, a former trade unionist, added.

He argued that in discussions on wages, terms and conditions of employment, companies take into account the possibility of payments for vacation, sick leave and redundancy in their calculations.