Jordan: No misclassification of workers allowed

Government’s encouragement of small businesses’ participation in the national social security scheme should not be an opening for the “misclassification” of workers by employers.

That message was sent by Minister of Labour, Social Security and the Third Sector, Colin Jordan as he led off discussion on the National Insurance and Social Security (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2023 in the House of Assembly on Tuesday.

“There are those who see the drive to encourage entrepreneurship, the drive to allow people to be involved as self-employed persons, as some kind of licence to get away from their moral obligation,” he said, adding that the new National Insurance and Social Security Service (NISSS) must put more emphasis on establishing who are employees and who are self-employed.

Though admitting that the government has also fallen short in this regard, Jordan said he was proud that the administration recognised this shortcoming and addressed it. He encouraged other employers to follow the government’s lead.

“We talk about decent work. Decent employers and decent business people recognise a certain morality in business and that includes making sure that persons who are really employees are so classified and that the social protection is afforded to them,” he said.

His comments were immediately followed by a warning by labour leader Toni Moore, Member of Parliament for St George North, of the “worrying trend” of “bad employers” classifying workers who are actually employees as being in pseudo and quasi-employment.

The General Secretary of the Barbados Workers’ Union (BWU) said this misclassification of workers should be of concern to the National Insurance Scheme (NIS) which has the legal authority to determine how workers are classified.

“What we have been observing over time is a very worrying trend where we find a number of workers in pseudo or quasi-employment . . . are being told that ‘you’re under a contract’, but when you do the control test as per our Employment Rights Act, what we find is that people who are often being told that they are contractors are actually employees,” Moore said.

Excusing those employers who are genuinely confused “out of ignorance”, she said what is concerning is those situations where there is evidence of actions of “very bad employers” regarding whether the worker is under a contract “for” service or a contract “of” service.
(SP)