CTUSAB rejects political motive claims over teachers’ sick-out

The head of Barbados’ umbrella trade union body has hit back at suggestions that last week’s sick-out by the Barbados Union of Teachers (BUT) was politically motivated, while calling for unity in the labour movement amid divisions with the Barbados Secondary Teachers’ Union (BSTU) over the long-running issue of term’s leave.

Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, the general secretary of the Congress of Trade Unions and Staff Associations of Barbados (CTUSAB), Dennis de Peiza, made it clear that the congress’s support for the BUT was rooted in principle, not politics.

“We need to put to bed any myths or notions that the trade union movement, and specifically the congress, is in any arrangement with any political entities,” he said.

His comments came after Minister of Educational Transformation Senator Chad Blackman questioned the timing of the two-day sick-out staged by the BUT last week, just before critical student examinations and weeks ahead of a by-election in which he is a candidate.

But de Peiza argued that it was not unusual for political figures to attempt to discredit trade union action through politicised narratives.

“You would understand that politicians would always try to create an atmosphere that gives an impression when they want to suit their interests,” he said. “Any particular trade union that lends itself to the political party, that is their right… all we are asking is that we stand under the labour movement, that we understand the nature of what we are doing.”

The BUT’s sick-out was staged in protest over the Ministry of Education’s failure to reinstate term’s leave after its cessation in 2014.

The trade unionist maintained that the BUT, as a CTUSAB affiliate, had the congress’s full backing, along with support from the eight other unions under its umbrella.

“If it were any union that had a matter of that nature, this congress would support,” he said. “Why? Because that organisation would have gone through the process of negotiation, and come to a point where you have exhausted all options, and you have to do something to press your case.”

He added that the industrial action was justified and overdue.

“There is a time in any negotiation that you have to determine when enough is enough. And any right-thinking person would not believe for one moment that 11 years is not the appropriate time to treat a matter, especially when that matter has been judicially decided upon by the courts.”

The division between the BUT and BSTU came to the fore after BSTU president Mary Redman publicly declined to support the sick-out, stating: “Industrial action takes place when there is a breakdown in the negotiation process and the BSTU is saying that, as far as we are concerned, there is no such thing happening.”

While refraining from directly criticising the BSTU’s leadership, de Peiza questioned the union’s apparent detachment from an issue he believes affects all teachers system-wide.

“Where the BSTU got involved? I cannot speak to that,” he said. “But if there was any attempt to remove a fundamental part of a teacher’s contract service, the unions should be speaking in a common voice… it is a violation of the person’s contractual obligation.”

He continued: “We supported the matter, because it was a matter which we saw as a principle was being violated.”

De Peiza also cast doubt on the process by which the BSTU engaged with the issue, noting a lack of coordination that could have otherwise presented a united front.

“Wouldn’t you believe it would be the most decent thing to do for the two unions to come together to have a discussion?” he asked. “But for the BUT to be invited to a meeting a week ago, about 10 o’clock at night, as far as I understand it, and to turn up in the morning to find the BSTU, or to be told, it is part of a meeting. Maybe they were never part of a discussion.”

De Peiza also emphasised the importance of conscience and accountability within the trade union movement. While respecting each union’s autonomy, he urged members to reflect on their leaders’ decisions.

“Everybody has to know what is right and what is wrong. How far you can go and how far you should not go,” he said. “We do not know whether the BSTU membership sanctioned the positioning of the BSTU [leader], but we are well aware that the BUT membership approved, gave the mandate to its leadership to take a particular course of action.”

The veteran educator also sought to clarify widespread misconceptions about teacher entitlements. He argued that teachers in Barbados do not receive vacation leave in the same way as other public servants and that term’s leave was a necessary mechanism for rest and recovery.

“I’ve read the general orders. I’ve read the Ministry of Public Service Act. There’s nowhere… that you will find vacation leave for teachers,” De Peiza said. “Teachers go to school when the students go and leave vacation-that is considered a break. But during that time, they are still engaged with helping students prepare for major exams, camps, and preparations for the following term or undergo training.

“They are not like other members of the public service who are allotted ‘x’ days of vacation per year. They are not like persons in the private sector who have a three-week, four or five-week vacation written in by law. This does not apply to teachers.

“It’s really unreasonable, when you bear all that in mind, to believe that the whole idea behind a term’s leave was to give those people an opportunity of respite, because there’s no recognised vacation leave in their contract of employment.”

(SZB)