Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
[00:00:10] Speaker B: This time we get into an interview on Wednesday, Labor Day.
Where is the labour movement at this point in time?
Is the labour movement still championing the cause that it set out to our workers still benefiting from the actions and activities of the labour movement? Joining us this morning, let's welcome to our program lecturer at the University of the West Indies, Doctor Jerome Tilak Singh. Doctor Tilak Singh, good morning to you and welcome to our show.
[00:00:44] Speaker C: Good morning Satish and good morning to your listeners. I'm very glad to be here today.
[00:00:50] Speaker B: Oh, it's nice to have you with us here this morning.
We know there are many other things that people, political landscape and so on. We'll discuss those a little later on in the show. Labor Day is going to be observed this week, but it calls for some reviewing of what's going on with the labor movement in this country, where labor came from, where it is and where it's heading. One of the sad things is that young people in our country are not necessarily as informed about the labor movement. The struggles, the trials, the tribulations and all that went on to get us to where we are. We'll speak about that a little later on. You ruffled more than a little feathers at a recent event in an address at the Adrian Kolerienzi Memorial Forum held in Cuba on Friday, where you suggested street unionists have abandoned their core principles and are not necessarily doing their job when it comes to representing workers and their issues and so on.
Let's begin for I don't want to misquote you or whatever else. Let's lay the foundation for the discussion. Exactly what did you say?
[00:02:07] Speaker C: Right. I said a number of issues.
I touched on the the strategies being used by the local trade unionists and I said that the time for rhetoric, the time for old talk, petitions, peaceful matches might be outdated because these strategies don't seem to be working. And I gave them evidence. I talked about the overdue wage negotiations for TT Post and Aviation Communication and Allied Workers Union. So I mentioned a few unions, Contractor General Workers Trade Union 2014 2016. They still have outstanding negotiations and need for new collective agreements.
I also mentioned the way in which the government has disrespected trade unions and don't seem to acknowledge their strength. And one example I give was where trade unions were demanding the reinstatement of the president of the industrial court.
So I gave a few examples and I touched regionally and internationally on the Caribbean Labor Congress and the ILO. I asked about the state of militancy and radicalism, you know, are they, you know, what are they doing? What is their input? How are they influencing the local and regional trade union movements? So those were some of the issues that, you know, the trade unions were very defensive and felt I was insulting them and, you know, being too critical.
[00:03:53] Speaker B: I mean, looking around, there is evidence that suggests that trade unions have not necessarily pulled their weight, for want of a different expression. And, I mean, one of the most glaring incidents involving trade unions and the lack thereof of their involvement was patriotism.
There are many people who believe to this day that the OWTU allowed that to happen because the government was dangling in front of the OWTU, the refinery, and that the OWTU was in clandestine talks with the government to facilitate some sort of deal behind doors, closed doors that saw the union not necessarily resisting the closure, which resulted in everybody from petrifying, being sent home. We all know how that transpired subsequent to that and, and everything else. Um, but trade unions and politics, they've, they've, they've commingled for a long period of time. But is there a different, how do I ask this? Trade unions in the past, and politicians had a certain type of relationship.
Has that relationship stayed true to its core mandate or has it been compromised?
[00:05:18] Speaker C: I'm glad you used that last word, compromise, because the public perception on the ground level, these are trade unionists and non trade unions, people who are not unionized. They believe that some unions have compromised their principles and that they are serving two masters, they are serving the government and they are serving their trade union.
And I get a perception that some of these unions, their hands are not clean. They are getting promises quietly from the government, as you mentioned, clandestine meetings. And I'm so glad you mentioned the closure of the oil refinery because a similar scenario occurred when our sugar industry collapsed. You know, the sugar union was undermined. So this is one way governments try to undermine and weaken a union by closing down a key industry. And I think the trade union, the labor movement and the public need to be aware of that.
[00:06:26] Speaker B: But what can be done? Because these discussions, I remember, I mean, in 2010, the trade union movement joined hands with the people's partnership. They were a party to the people's partnership, the convention that was signed in fights about the fights about our court and all that kind of thing. And it's not the first time. I mean, bastard pandemic came out of the labor, the labor movement, the alternate sugar and general workers trade union. And so, so history is littered with, with evidence of of politics and trade unionism, not necessarily going hand in hand, but having some sort of arrangement moving forward.
What do you think would have contributed to the decline in respect for trade unions at this point in time? Because I'm sure that if we open the phone lines and we ask people, do you still have the kind of faith and trust in trade unions as you did in days gone by, we might hear people saying, well, resoundingly, no.
What's your thoughts?
[00:07:40] Speaker C: I think the problem is that when governments come into power, they take key persons from the trade unions and put them in the Senate or they let them serve as mp's in the lower house. And this is to give the public that, the perception that, you know, we are government representing the people, representing all sectors. But when you do that, the message that you send, you know, is that that union is in the back pocket of the government. For example, you would know. You had Selwyn John who served as a senator in the UNC time, during Eric Williams time. He had a few people serving in his government. So it gives the union, it becomes, it makes the union politicized. The union has a voice in parliament, but it makes the union politicized. What do unions have to do? They need to form their own political party. That was done in 1975 with the United labor front and try to get unholy reins of power, try to get into the government. Right. So I think the, that could be a strategy. But I want to tell you that, you know, I mentioned this in the speech last Thursday that when they go to the bargaining table and the chief personal officer, the CPO offers zero, zero, 2%. You know, that very offer of 0% is an insult and it shows the way the shabby treatment that the government has been treating the unions.
[00:09:23] Speaker B: Let's speak about how this impacts on the worker because it's all well and good to speak about the trade unions and how they've, some people say they sell their soul and all the sleeping with the devil and whatever else, you can find all kinds of quotes to describe what's taking place. The, if I were to use the term real victims and all of this would be the working population who is not getting the kind of attention that they need. What are some of your thoughts?
[00:09:52] Speaker C: I agree with you because a worker who is not properly paid will take sick leave, there'll be low productivity, they'll be leaving early, they will find excuses to work slow. So there are repercussions for not settling wage negotiations. There are repercussions because a worker, maybe a worker who cannot afford to feed his family, might have to work two and three jobs. He might have to face traffic on a daily basis and deliberately decide to reach later work when he does get his back pay. Because of inflation, it's not worth much. Some workers might even be considering turning to crime to feed their family, to survive. So these are some of the problems. You know, the government doesn't realize that denying a worker a fair wage could create serious social and economic problems.
[00:10:52] Speaker B: What is that? You see, that's, that's, that's where the discussion gets. I don't want to say controversial, but interesting because we continue to hear about a fair wage and living wage and all those things. And in my discussions with trade unionists and person involved in the movement and so on, they don't, they've not convinced me that they understand, let me put it that way. What are fair wage and what are living wages? You know, it's a term that is used that is so gray in nature that it allows someone to have a hundred different interpretations of what a living wage is and what are fair wages and all those kinds of things.
And nobody has been able to pinpoint, well, this is how you calculate what a living wage is and all those kinds of things. So it's a nice catchphrase that unions use all the time to rally up support because persons who are living on minimum wage, when you tell them that there's a possibility that they could get much more money if we use this system, people are definitely going to gravitate towards it. But how do we, how do we address some of these concerns? Because it's all well and good to highlight them and say, well, all right, these are the problems. These were the change in your movement supposed to be doing. They're not doing, and this is probably why. But how do we begin to fix a problem, the kinds of which have been identified in this discussion thus far?
[00:12:20] Speaker C: I think what, one of the first steps would be ensuring that the government has the workers at heart. And when I use workers, and I mention this in my speech, I'm not talking about workers who are unionized. I'm talking about workers who are contract labor. Contract labor are the ones being exploited.
Contract labor cannot join a union.
Contract labor cannot get benefits, medical and health benefits. They are the ones who are facing the brunt of the present conditions. And that's very unfortunate. So that the trade unions, when they sit with the government, they also have to raise the issue of workers who are not in their union. And I think this ruffles some trade units because they don't see those contract laborers, those contract workers as their priority or their concerns. They raise the issue. But over the years, for the last decade, I've been saying that a worker who is in CP who is injured, he has no form of compensation, he or she has to go to that medical center and foot that bill if they have to go to a private health center for the bill, you know. So I am seeing where when talks occur between the government and trade unions, they have to bring in workers, illegal venezuelan workers who come in here and have been exploited.
Are we supposed to ignore them? They are working in the country, legal migrants being exploited. Are we supposed to ignore them because they are not being unionized? So I think these are some of the issues that, you know, created this approach. But contract labor, those who are exploited at my heart are. And I want to address those things.
[00:14:19] Speaker B: Yeah, it's glaring. Some of the issues that seem to just go unaddressed when it comes to the working class and the trade unions. You've said over and over that they've become defensive. When you raised some of these issues representing contract workers who are facing exploitation and a sector of the working pool now that has no rights whatsoever as the venezuelan immigrant population and all these other things, it speaks to whittling away of the relevance, and I hope I'm using the right word, the relevance of the trade union movement. Many people feel that, and this is from the people that I've spoken to, that they do not get the kind of justice that they deserve if things happen to them. And they believe that trade unions now have become so involved with politics, as we spoke of earlier on, that they're between a rock and a hard place to champion because of workers. The industrial court is supposed to be the, I don't want to say the final frontier, but it is where workers are entitled to some sort of justice one way or the other. Let's speak about the industrial court. Is the industrial court fulfilling its mandate in your opinion?
[00:15:49] Speaker C: But satish, that is a real, I don't even want to say a hornet's nest. I want to use the local term and say that as a Japanese because, um, I have spoken to trade union, I've spoken to leaders, I've spoken to members of the trade union and they told. They have told me off the record, they have told me unofficially and they asked me not to name the union. But you know, there are concerns that they are not being fairly treated at the industrial court. And this was a shock to me because in Trinity and Tobago, and across the world we see the court system as the last resort for justice. Courts are symbols of justice. And whenever there is this perception that there's a politician of judges who are appointed, it's a cause for grave concern. So there is a feeling amongst some trade unionists, not all, that when a matter goes to industrial court, there are two major issues concerning the unions. The matter is dragged on, it's dragged on for many years. And when it goes against the employer and employer loses, that employer appeals the case and the case has to drag on for more years. So the length of time for justice is a concerning industrial court. And also, as I said, the appointees, people are concerned that these people are not fair and they are not objective. I'm not saying all, I don't want to broad brush any of these appointees, I don't know anybody. They might be people of integrity. But that is the feeling, the suspicion amongst unions that something is not right at the industrial court.
[00:17:44] Speaker B: Well, the reason why I raised it is because of the, the entire controversy surrounding how Deborah Thomas Felix was, was told that here, what's going on? Your contract. And at the end of that she was not even in the country. And it was very unceremonial the manner in which she was treated. Now the trade unions, the trade unions raised their concerns, but this matter about whether or not the trade unions get a fair hearing at the industrial court should concern more people.
For the simple reason is that the industrial court is there to champion the cause of workers and to make sure that businesses and workers, their relationship is conducted within the confines of the law. It's not there to be on the workers side alone or the business side alone or whatever else.
The industrial court is supposed to strike that balance.
And with some of the things that we've seen, as you're highlighting, there is concern about that balance. I was privy to a discussion some time ago and the discussion surrounded decertifying several elements of the trade union movement.
And it was a discussion that was very frank about the interests that are served and who stands to benefit and what are the pros and cons of a matter going to the industrial court and dragging on for years in some instances. And then at the end it seems as though there's a pattern as to how these things work out.
What we're discussing here this morning is very important, it's very concerning, or at least it should be, because you cannot tell when any worker is going to need the services of the industrial court. And when you go to the industrial court, one would hope especially if you're the person petitioning the court. One would hope that your matter is treated with fairly.
And now with all of these nuances in the public discussion about politics and its involvement and everything else, it's cause for people to raise more than just an eyebrow. One of the other things you spoke about trade unions not necessarily paying as much attention to the issue of crime, one could argue, well, that's not necessarily the trade union job. How would you respond to that?
[00:20:21] Speaker C: You're very correct there in that there has always been, not just in Trinidad and Tobago, but across the world, that unions campaign and they fight for better wages and better working conditions for their workers. But what I try to raise in my speech is that many of the persons who are victims of crime and many of the persons who were murdered are members of the working class.
Some of these people who are victims and were murdered might have been people who are members of the unions too. So that you cannot isolate and you cannot put in a cocoon, you cannot put it in a silo and say crime is the government business or the opposition business. And what I said was that, yes, the unions often raise issues, social issues, but they have to continually, continuously address an issue as crime because it is so high in a small country like this. And I didn't just mention crime. I also mentioned the horrible tragedy of those babies who died recently in April at the port of Spain hospital. When that was revealed to the public. And the question I asked was, where was the voice of labor? And funny enough, one of the labor representatives said that labor did make a statement and I asked the person, the Labour representative after, is it possible that the media might be silencing the voice of labor because it goes against the government? So we also have to look at that, the way in which the media might not carry the voice of labor because maybe the media doesn't want to ruffle the feathers of the government. The media doesn't want to appear to be in league with the opposition so that anything anti government might not be highlighted. So the, when I ask where's the voice of labor? It doesn't mean that labor is doing nothing. It simply means I'm also throwing the question to the media. Why are you not highlighting the voice of labor when they question issues like crime and the deaths of these babies at Iniku?
[00:22:41] Speaker B: Doctor Tsing, I'm, we are out of time because I have some commercials to take us up to the top. But this is such an engaging conversation. It really speaks to some serious, serious matters. I want to thank you for being with us here this morning and giving us greater detail explaining some of what you said. Because, you know, sometimes people just read the headlines and they run away with a perception that is not necessarily reflective of what the discussion really was. So I want to thank you for being with us here this morning and for us delving a little deeper into these things.
[00:23:11] Speaker C: Right. And thanks very much.
[00:23:14] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
