The GAWU cannot fail to offer a response to Mr Lincoln Lewis’ letter which appeared in the January 19 editions of the Kaieteur News and Guyana Chronicle.
We agree fully when Lincoln says that “[s]ugar is a very serious matter…”. But, for us at least, despite the seriousness it ought to attract, we find it most disheartening that the powers-that-be apparently do not share a similar view. Their flippant treatment of the industry and those who depend on it continues to be demonstrated time and again. A case in point is just last week regards President Granger rather than addressing a petition which was sent to him since October, 2019, and supported by thousands of sugar workers, on the matter of a pay rise denied to sugar workers, since he took office, was, apparently, nonchalantly sent to his Minister of Agriculture.
The President had previously committed, initially, to addressing the matter himself after he was advised by GuySuCo. It appears, after he received the GuySuCo advice, a fact we have been reliably informed of, the President didn’t like what he read or heard and has now decided to pass the buck. Similar approaches have been repeated time and again and is very irksome especially considering that the industry is state-owned and the single largest employer in the land notwithstanding its diminution under the Granger Administration. Such an approach does not coincide with the expressed view that sugar is a serious matter when it comes to the Coalition.
Mr Lewis said he is seemingly not bothered by the remarks of Mr Ramjattan, though it ought to send shivers down the spine of any right-thinking person. Moreover, the long-standing trade unionist says it is Mr Jagdeo that he is concerned about. His pre-occupation with the former President and now Opposition Leader is indeed incomprehensible. We recognise there may have been instances where Mr Jagdeo and the GAWU and the sugar workers did not see eye-to-eye but he did not treat workers as shabbily as they have been treated by the current regime.
Certainly, Mr Jagdeo recognized their contribution to the nation and during his Administration, sugar workers were treated with respect and dignity. Even when the industry couldn’t have afforded to offset pay rises to the workers he stepped in ensure that the sugar workers, like all other workers, benefitted from some improvement in their pay levels. Contrast that with what prevails now-a-days wherein sugar workers are treated as seeming outcasts not deserving of the least of the State’s sympathy. Just a few days ago, displaced sugar workers, at a press briefing, shared their hardships and lamented that the people who put them on the breadline have turned their backs on them.
The letter writer says we are “…well aware of my position on respecting the right to collective bargaining…”, we do not contest this whatsoever; in fact we laud and welcomed Mr Lewis’ support. We are next told that “[w]ith regards to the matter of Termination and Severance benefits for sugar workers, both the Jagdeo government and APNU+AFC have flouted the law…”. On this score, we wish to share with Mr Lewis that the only matter regarding severance pay during the Jagdeo government regarded the Diamond workers. While our Union did seek judicial intervention after the GuySuCo refused to respect the workers rights, the matter never came up for any hearing as the Corporation recanted and honoured its obligations to the workers. This is unlike what has happened in recent times where the Courts not only heard several matters but upheld that the workers rights must be respected. In fact, in one instance, as we pointed out before, we are still in the Courts battling to ensure the workers severance pay rights are respected.
Mr Lewis says we sought to convey that the sugar industry did not face challenges. We have never hidden from this reality. We have accepted that difficulties were encountered but, at the same time, we cannot disregard that steps were being taken to overcome those problems. It’s akin to throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. We are told too that the Corporation had to rely on Government support. We hasten to ask what is so wrong with this? Shouldn’t the industry, more so as a state-owned enterprise, benefit from assistance from the State, especially considering its manifold contributions to the nation and its people. Let us not forget, that in some instances, such assistance received the support of the then Opposition, some of whom occupy high places in today’s Government. Is Mr Lewis saying sugar shouldn’t have received State assistance in spite of its contribution to the nation?
The letter-writer next refers to a March, 2013 Kaieteur News report about the Skeldon factory. It was well-known that the intention of the Skeldon investment was intended to improve the industry’s viability. We remain convinced that the investment was worthwhile and with appropriate improvements could realize its potential. Just consider that the factory’s co-generation plant alone was bringing in nine billion per annum in 2016 when output was one-third of capacity. Indeed, there is potential.
Lincoln next says that unionists “…hate to see the loss of jobs…”, therefore, he must fully well understand our consistent and vehement defence of the industry to staunch further job losses and making a bad situation even worse. We are also told that Mr Jagdeo displayed stubbornness regarding initiatives that originated from Mr Hoyte and Mr Corbin. That stubbornness he opined didn’t serve the working-class. Are, we therefore to conclude, that the stubbornness displayed by the Coalition also indicates they are not serving the working-class? Even if it were that Mr Jagdeo did display stubbornness, from Lincoln’s arguments, Messrs Hoyte and Corbin did realize some success with their initiatives indicating that Mr Jagdeo accepted their proposals and went on to implement them. Again contrast that with the Coalition which has disregarded proposals from GAWU. Surely, Lincoln will not support the current Government disregarding our Union’s submissions?
We are next told that there isn’t any trade union solidarity. Mr Lewis, again, is aware of the GAWU position on solidarity. We have never failed to lend our voice and support to matters of workers concern. Similarly, we recognize and appreciate Lincoln’s supportive voice during our struggles as well.
Lincoln again speaks about Dr Jagan and his defence of sugar workers. We hasten to remind the trade unionist that Cde Cheddi was concerned about the well-being of all workers and was a champion of their cause and stood as an ally of the working-class. While we recognize Dr Jagan’s contribution, we, at the same time, cannot disregard Mr Jagdeo’s support during the recent and ongoing struggles of the sugar workers. While Mr Jagdeo and Dr Jagan’s approach may be different, their goal remains the same in that they hold that the sugar workers, like all workers, be treated justly, equitably and fairly.
