‘Unfortunate’, AG says after Judge orders gov’t not to cut teachers’ salaries or stop deduction of union dues

High Court Judge Sandil Kissoon on Thursday granted two conservatory orders preventing the government from cutting the salaries of striking teachers and also blocking the decision to discontinue the deduction of union dues from their salaries.

The orders remain in place until a determination is made in the substantive hearing of the matter which is now set for March 20, 2024.

The Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU), through attorney Darren Wade, in a fixed date application filed on February 16, sought to quash the government’s actions which they deemed as discriminatory and a breach and violation of key rights.

Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, SC, was named as the respondent in the application.

In an interview with the Department of Public Information (DPI) following the court hearing, Nandlall maintained that in keeping with the rules, a period of 14 days is usually required before a hearing is scheduled.

As such, he said he was placed at a disadvantage.

In his argument before the court, the Attorney General said he referenced the several aspects of the law, as he highlighted why neither of the conservatory orders should be granted.

In relation to the order which sought to restrain the government from deducting salaries from the striking teachers, Nandlall said he emphasised heavily on the ‘no work, no pay’ policy.

“I showed very clearly that the law in Guyana and the rest of the Caribbean is that the relationship which exists between public servants, teachers and the government is one of employee and employer relationship. And the law is in relation to strike is, if the employee decides to withhold their labour and strike, a right which they have, then the employer is entitled to withhold pay.

“…So if teachers continue to strike, then the employer which is the government must continue to have the power to deduct their salaries,” the Attorney General explained.

In relation to the conservatory order for the deduction of monthly dues, Nandlall pointed out that the union has not even been unable to account why annual returns were not filed.

“And you want me to continue to deduct this money and transmit it to you? I owe a duty to act responsibility and accountability and transparently. I have obligations by law to do so. So, on what basis I am being ordered to continue to union dues?” he argued.

However, Nandlall said he was unable to convince the judge of the “principle,” and as a result both of the orders were granted to the GTU, a decision which he deemed to be “unfortunate.”

“I believe that it is wrong to order one side to perform their side of the bargain when the other side is not performing their side of the bargain. So, I believe that decision was unfortunate. The orders should not be granted,” Nandlall said.

Teachers across the country have been participating in industrial action organised by the GTU since February 5 as they demand higher salary increases and duty-free concessions, among other entitlements.

Through the court action, the GTU sought a total of 18 reliefs; the union is alleging a breach of their right to freedom of association and assembly; their right to protection from deprivation of property; and their right to be heard before determining that it will cease the practice of performing as an agent of the union to deduct union dues from the wages and salaries of teachers.

Wade, on behalf of the GTU, listed 55 grounds for the application supported by Section 5 (1) (a), (h), and (q) of the Judicial Review Act 2010.

He listed a series of exchanges between the GTU and the government dating back to 2020 when the Ministry of Education and the GTU began engagement on a proposed multi-year agreement that demands salary increases and duty-free concessions, among other things.

The GTU believes talks have broken down and the process should move to arbitration but the Education and Labour Ministries maintain that talks are still ongoing.

The Chief Education Officer, Saddam Hussain had told the News Room that before the strike action, the GTU was already in discussions with the ministry and there was an agreement for the two sides to meet on the third Wednesday of every month.

“As a matter of fact, when we met on January 31, we agreed to meet (with the Union) on the third Wednesday of every month and the next meeting was scheduled for February 21,” the CEO said.

He further noted that the ministry remains open to continuing this already established procedure of meeting and engaging the union; the union has since refused to go back to the table unless a formal invitation is extended by the government.

The substantive hearing of the court matter was initially set for April 4. However, taking into consideration the importance of the matter and to allow an earlier conclusion, the hearing was brought forward to an earlier date, March 20.

Advertisement

_____