Akeel to probe Ganga's grouses
By Courtney Jones
Chief Labour Officer Mohamed Akeel is to investigate claims by government's representative on the public service pay tribunal that he was excluded from the process as controversy continues to swirl around the award announced on Tuesday. Health and Labour Minister Dr Henry Jeffrey made this disclosure at a press conference held at the GTV-11 studios yesterday. "Let me say precisely at this stage that government is bound and stands by its word (to honour the award). But we realise that we cannot take away from government's right to question the award of the tribunal if it took into consideration matters which it should not or did not take into consideration matters which it should or acted procedurally incorrect", Jeffrey said. Jeffrey said that allegations by government's representative Dr Gobind Ganga that he was not consulted on the award given on Monday "raises serious issues about the workings of the tribunal." The three-man tribunal headed by Dr Aubrey Armstrong and including the unions' representative, Dr Clive Thomas awarded public servants an across-the-board salary increase of 31.06% for 1999 based on the salary as of December 31, 1998 and 26.67% based on the December 31, 1999 salary structure for 2000. In a letter to Jeffrey dated August 31, the day after the award was announced at the Hotel Tower, Ganga expressed surprise at the quantum of the award announced and alleged that it was done without consultation with him. "I was in contact with Dr Armstrong and Professor Thomas on Monday 11.30 am when the Chairman requested a meeting with me to see whether we could arrive at a consensus. "At that meeting the award was 25% for scales one to ten (1-10)and 17% for scales eleven to fourteen (11-14)", Ganga's letter said. The letter went on to allege that up to 11.50 am on Tuesday he was not told of the award and that his minority report was based entirely on an award of 25% and 17% for 1999. "Something must be very wrong if a tribunal member retires to write a minority report against a particular award only to find on the completion of the report and at the time of presentation, that another award, of which he knew nothing, is announced", Jeffrey said. Jeffrey described this development as disturbing when put in the context of a press statement by Armstrong and Thomas which stated that despite 11th hour efforts to reach a consensus, the tribunal was split causing Armstrong to cast his vote with the union representative. Jeffrey said what Ganga is claiming is that as a member of the tribunal he was excluded from the most crucial aspect of its deliberations and that if this is so the tribunal would not have acted as a tribunal is intended to act. "This could have serious negative consequences for much of our (the Labour Ministry's) future work", Jeffrey told the media. In response to a question about government honouring the award, Jeffrey said that government is still not certain that procedural requirements were breached but that as of now, it was bound to honour the award since the terms of resumption agreement between the unions and government "was binding". He said the government also has a right to insist that the tribunal only take into account those things within its mandate and act procedurally correct. "If there is any validity to Dr Ganga's claim the government will have to make a decision as to whether or not it goes to law about this decision", Jeffrey said. He reminded that government has 45 days to fulfil the agreement, but he stressed that since Ganga's allegations called into question many things, the government has a responsibility to investigate the issue. Jeffrey also said that if the situation warranted this based on Akeel's investigation, the government has the option of also going to the courts. Jeffrey also in response to a question, challenged Armstrong to put forward witnesses and say who had pressured him during the arbitration hearings. Armstrong had said on Monday that he had received calls, "not from union members" seeking to pressure him into a certain type of judgement. After the handing over of the report, Armstrong had repeated the allegation specifically talking about a government person calling his and saying that everytime he got such a call he had three persons listening in to the conversation. In fact he alleged that every time Ganga left a tribunal meeting he would get a call detailing all that was discussed. But Jeffrey denied all knowledge of any attempts by government to pressure the arbitration tribunal chairman noting that he himself had spoken to Armstrong on several occasions to stress the importance of the tribunal arriving at a consensus. On the point about a majority decision of the tribunal, Jeffrey said the law approved of this but that his own view was that Guyana was already a divided society and when things cleaved along the lines of the arbitration process it was very bad for Guyana. Jeffrey disclosed that as chairman, Armstrong was paid around US$9,000 to cover salary, hotel and travelling expenses. He said his view was that the money was well spent since it "sent the process of democracy forward" and since it was a peaceful way of dealing with events that are controversial.
|