News Feed

October 27, 2016 - United win Manchester derby Juan Mata struck to win a tight Man ... +++ October 27, 2016 - IAAF wants Bolt’s services KINGSTON, Jamaica – IAAF Pres ... +++ October 27, 2016 - Proper shutdown protocol needed, says Bynoe The Department of Emergency Managem ... +++ October 27, 2016 - ‘Out of touch’ Economist Ryan Straughn says the la ... +++ October 27, 2016 - Lowe looking to protect the south coast A senior policymaker has warned tha ... +++ October 27, 2016 - Road Hockey 5s hit halfway mark After three weeks of competition th ... +++

‘Inject’ yourself, PM!

Opposition leader calls on Stuart to intervene in BIDC dispute

With Barbados facing the likelihood of a general strike this week, Opposition Leader Mia Mottley told a Barbados Labour Party (BLP) public meeting at Providence, Christ Church last night she was in possession of evidence of intimidation of public sector workers.

Additionally, she told the crowd that the issue, which had contributed to the present deteriorating industrial relations climate — the recent early retirement of 10 state-run Barbados Investment and Development Corporation (BIDC) employees — could be easily solved by a Cabinet decision.

However, she accused Prime Minister Freundel Stuart of avoiding the issue and allowing the Minister of Labour Dr Esther Byer to fly out to New York over this weekend to save her from another failure on the industrial relations front.

Mottley noted that trade unions were not yet seeking pay raises on behalf of workers, or pursuing “broken promises of duty-free cars and interest-free mortgages”.  “They are (only) asking for workers security of tenure to be protected,” she said.

Brandishing a document, the Opposition Leader spoke of an occurrence following the one-day protest march through the City last Monday.

Opposition leader Mia Mottley

Opposition leader Mia Mottley

“That a letter could come from within a ministry asking . . .  to identify the names of all public officers who attended the protest march on July 6, 2015, is not only regressive, but you will have the likes of national heroes who fought for workers’ rights in this country, [Sir] Frank Walcott, [Sir] Hugh Springer, and [Sir] Grantley Adams, rolling in their graves.”

She said these national heroes would find it unbelievable “that a modern Government, almost 50 years after Independence, conceives to intimidate workers, asking for their names when all they are doing is that which the Constitution of Barbados guarantees them to [do]: associate on behalf of the workers of this country”.

Throughout the current industrial dispute, BLP spokespersons have said it was a matter for the unions and the employers, and their role was to support the workers. However, in light of the alleged intimidation, Mottley vowed last night to take the BLP’s involvement further.

“I say that if this intimidation starts, you will see and feel the full force of the Barbados Labour Party in this country. We are not going to tolerate it. This party was founded on the principle of workers’ rights . . . . There are too many people who walked with Grantley Adams and all of the others to bring rights to your grandparents, and great-grandparents and parents when they couldn’t do anything to protect themselves in this country,” she said.

Mottley went on: “Do you understand that all that is required is for the Cabinet of Barbados to meet and . . . tell the Minister of Industry that this Government will not discriminate against people on the basis of age?”

“I have authority to speak on this matter because I was the one who led the [parliamentary] debate in 2004 that sought to harmonize the retirement age of people in statutory boards with the one in the private sector and under the National Insurance Scheme. And we said then that we needed to delay the age from 65 to 67 and we would do it over a period of time.

“The section that was left for the statutory boards to send home an individual at 60 was never intended to send home a class of persons and, in this case, a class of persons across every department of the IDC, connected only by age. That is wrong and that is discriminatory.”

Mottley criticized Prime Minister Freundel Stuart for so far adopting a hands-off approach to the matter. She referred to his July 4 statement at a CARICOM press conference that he was not invited to mediate in the dispute, and was not going to “inject” himself into the matter.

“When he told the country he does not inject himself, I really had to laugh . . . . He couldn’t be for real,” Mottley said.

“You have a strike that threatens to shut down this whole country, and you goin’ talk bout you ain’t injecting yourself in the process.”

The Opposition Leader then turned her attention to the Minister of Labour, Dr Esther Byer, who previous speakers at the meeting said was in the US despite the tension of industrial action in Barbados. Photos of Byer, presumably in New York, were posted on a jumbo screen at the rally.

Mottley said, “Mercifully, she has been sent abroad to save the unions and workers and Barbados from her perfect record of failure because she has not yet solved a single labour dispute in this country. So she may do better entertaining the friends of DLP in New York.”

10 Responses to ‘Inject’ yourself, PM!

  1. carson c cadogan July 14, 2015 at 8:02 am

    Mia so nice to see you talking again as you and your Barbados Labour Party members and operatives within the new leadership of the Unions stoke the fire in order to burn down Barbados.

    However you are strangely silent even dumb with regards to your Legal Qualifications. The Hon. Dr. Lowe challenged you to bring your Certifications to Parliament and make them them a document of the House just as he had done following your challenge to him. Do you remember that MIA? You have not done so to this day, one wonders why? Mouthpieces have spoken on your behalf, which is not like you. You have an opinion on every thing under the Sun.

    When are you going to bring your LAW CERTIFICATE to Parliament for the all the World to see?

    We all know that the Laws of Barbados require a Law Certificate to practice Law.

  2. dave July 14, 2015 at 9:20 am

    No No we do not need advice from Margaret Knight , a known DLP OPERATIVE –Take a Hike !!!

    The Government is stoking the Government. The Government wants to bring down the Government …..

  3. Mervin Errol
    Mervin Errol July 14, 2015 at 9:41 am

    Let me at the outset of my contribution reproduce a paragraph allegedly made by Ms Mottley. Quote:: ” The section that was left was not for the Statutory Boards to send home an individual at 60 was never intended to send home a class of persons and, in this case, a class of persons across every department of the IDC. connected only by age. This is wrong and that is discriminatory.” Now Ms Mottley you disappoint because this paragraph is so very contradictory and fails to connect with what we have come to expect from you. Let us analyse it. First of all why in establishing new guidelines a sentence of such grave gravity was allowed to remain? Section 8(1) states conclusively that the IDC has a right to terminate the service of any employee at the age of 60. You pilot this through the house and yet it remained. Why? Now you are saying that it was not intended to send home an individual. Are you for real Ms Mottley? What do you mean? Where is the written documentation? In this case, a class of persons across every department? Section 8(1) is a class under the ACT. And it has to be across every department. Your final statement in this paragraph is laughable. How so? “A CLASS OF PERSONS ACROSS EVERY DEPARTMENT CONNECTED ONLY BY AGE. Please tell us that the reporter misquoted you. But section 8(1) specifies the age limit so they will have to be connected by age. Your final sentence. “This is wrong and that is discriminatory. No Ms Mottley, the very fact that they are connected by age does not constitute discrimination according to section 8(1).

  4. Deals On Wheels
    Deals On Wheels July 14, 2015 at 9:55 am

    Another intelligent commentator!

  5. Donna July 14, 2015 at 10:31 am

    I am no supporter of Mia Mottley nor of the BLP however I have this ability to accept when somebody has a point regardless of their political affiliation. Some of you here, unfortunately, do not have that ability. Sad!

  6. Andrew July 14, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    Seriously though Carson Cadogan, our country is on the verge of being shut down and u speaking of a qualifications???? Tell me that was a mistake please!!! We are seeing mismanagement and ineptitude of the highest order,never before seen in our country and u talking crap….please man,leave out the partisan politics and let us come together and seek to find a solution collectively!!!

  7. zeus July 14, 2015 at 1:42 pm

    So is mia saying that the law is there to be used by the government but they sent home too many ….I am lost

  8. jrsmith July 14, 2015 at 3:57 pm

    @, Andrew, hail, right on the button, I agree with you, but , who is willing to come together, to do what, there was sufficent time ,before strike action to have , some discussions.

    You must also, realize and notice , no one as part of the badly manage government is showing any real concern, they still would be paid, no matter what.

  9. Ormond Mayers July 15, 2015 at 2:18 am

    People wake up, it is the BLP and Ms.Mia Mottley that is responsible for the piece of law the BIDC is using to send home the workers at 60.

  10. jus me July 15, 2015 at 5:28 am

    Mottley or Stuart, what a choice!!

    We drowning and some throws us TWO pieces of DEADWOOD to cling onto.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *