Sugar workers get 6% for 2002, 5% for 2003

Arbitration ruling
Sugar workers get 6% for 2002, 5% for 2003
Increases tied to inflation

Stabroek News
May 24, 2003

*Related Links:*	Articles on sugar
Letters Menu	Archival Menu

Sugar workers were yesterday awarded a 6% wage increase by an arbitration tribunal for 2002 while the 2003 increase of 5% reflects the projected rate of inflation for this year.

The workers will receive an overall increase of six per cent retroactive from January 2002 for last year and five per cent retroactive from January 2003 for this year. This could be adjusted depending on the final inflation rate at the end of the year. This amounts to an increased wage bill of $170M for Guysuco's 20,000 strong workforce. Employees will also continue to receive an Annual Production Incentive and Workers Performance Incentive which are tax free and may amount to as much as 25% of their earnings.

Both the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers' Union (GAWU) and the National Association of Agricultural, Commercial and Industrial Employees (NAACIE) said they accepted the awards but were not satisfied since it fell short of what they had bargained for.

In announcing the awards yesterday, Prem Persaud, Chairman of the arbitration panel which included, David Yankana and Norman McLean said an inflation related increase was the safest or best way to proceed. Inflation was declared by the Statistical Bureau for 2002 as being 6.1% and he said the tribunal had walked a tight rope to make the 2003 award based on an inflation rate of 5% "to be adjusted on the announcement of the final rate by the Statistical Bureau." GAWU's final position for 2002 had been 10%.

The unions and Guysuco had fallen out during wage negotiations in the year 2001 and 2002 resulting in NAACIE leading its workers on a week-long strike. Minister of Labour, Dr Dale Bisnauth referred the two sides to arbitration. NAACIE had asked for 38% across-the-board increase for its workers for the year 2001. But Guysuco went ahead and paid an 8.5% increase.

Persaud pointed out yesterday that the tribunal felt that the award of 8.5% given by Guysuco was quite adequate under all the circumstances, hence they did not increase it.

He said, "the tribunal noted that Guysuco's employment costs had climbed from 41% in 1992 to some 64% of total costs in 2002 and we felt that such a trend was unsustainable if Guyana, not just Guysuco, is to have any meaningful improvement to its long term viability."

Merit increments 'unnecessary'

On the issue of merit increments, Persaud said in principle the tribunal felt that it was superfluous and unnecessary and should be discontinued and if anything, should be incorporated into the across-the-board increase granted after collective labour negotiations to be decided by both the corporation and the unions.

He noted that in their judgement, merit increments were tied to the annual performance scheme and should represent a minimum/maximum range in the across-the-board increase scheme. He added that as a result an average worker could attract a 4% increase, whilst a better performing worker could earn a 5% increase and a superior worker could earn the maximum increase of 6%.

This would afford management some flexibility in the award system and recognise individual performance rather than years of service.

Incentives must reflect costs

With regards to the Annual Production Incentive and Workers Performance Incentive, Persaud pointed out that these have contributed to the improvement in Guysuco's performance and in man days per tonne of sugar. He said the tribunal felt that these must be continued as an effective tool to improve performance.

The tribunal recommended that consideration be given to emphasising cost per tonne and safety, which he said would help employees to focus on those issues, critical to their future such as tonnes of sugar per annum by estate, cost per tonne and lost time accidents.

He added that, "We are convinced that it is possible for Guysuco and the unions to co-operate and collaborate more effectively and develop a win/win disposition."

Persaud, in his report, stated that apart from the wage negotiations, Guysuco had requested an amendment to clauses 3 and 4 of the Memorandum of Agreement with NAACIE.

But Persaud noted that the tribunal thought the principle had been well established that either on promotion or acting, an employee must attract some increase, or remuneration for increased responsibilities regardless of the minimum/maximum pay scales and structures.

"Indeed we felt that Guysuco over time has managed a salary/wage system, which created serious anomalies leading to this development, which impacted negatively on employees."

According to the chairman, the corporation is therefore mandated to address as a matter of urgency, a comprehensive study to deal with these issues and create a more manageable salary/wage structure. Persaud said no sound corporate strategy could seriously address viability and solvency with 64% of revenue being paid out in wages and salaries.

Persaud reported that the tribunal was convinced that conciliation and arbitration should be seen as a last resort and the panel felt that the collective process should have been more vigorously pursued and resolved bilaterally.

He stressed that the parties needed to establish greater trust and goodwill and to understand the realities of the difficult economic climate within which sugar and Guysuco are operating.

Guysuco was represented by Industrial Relations Director, Jairam Petam, senior counsel Miles Fitzpatrick and Keith Massiah, while NAACIE was represented by its President, Kenneth Joseph, General Secretary Takechandra and Bhagmat Hochand.

GAWU was represented by its President, Komal Chand, Roodlall Moonilal and Seepaul Narine.

GAWU represents mainly field and factory staff at Guysuco while NAACIE represents the clerical staff and some factory workers.