EDITORIAL: To the end of stalemate and inaction

Thu, May 10, 2012 - 12:00 AM

FINALLY, A RANGE OF ISSUES relating to the labour market and its management are being dealt with in one document, enshrined in the laws of this land.

Among those addressed, of course, are the rights of the employee, the manner of terminating his or her employment and treating to any possible unfair dismissal, and the role, powers and responsibilities of the Chief Labour Officer.

Highly commendable was that the draft Employment Rights Bill was made available to the Social Partnership, employers’ agencies and trade unions for perusal and study before its becoming law.

Naturally the stakeholders would have wanted to be satisfied that the provisions in the bill were what could be discussed and agreed upon, and where there were still concerns that these could be addressed when taken to Parliament.

It has not been unknown for matters to go before Parliament and be passed without stakeholders having an opportunity to preview them or make any input, with subsequent provisions in legislation proving either onerous or discomfiting, and attempts at correction being very difficult or awkward.

Not unfamiliar with this circumstance, as a Member of Parliament and a lawyer himself, Prime Minister Freundel Stuart has made clear his resolution for any shortcomings the Employment Rights Bill passed on Tuesday might throw up.

Mr Stuart told Parliament: “If we have shortcomings, they will be taken care of by amendments, as has happened with other pieces of legislation. We are always in here amending pieces of legislation; that is what the amending process is for.”

Seemingly, that part of the bill dealing with reinstatement of a worker troubles some employers, but the Prime Minister says these bosses ought not to be unhappy with the area they are complaining about, since if they comply with the “more egalitarian” set of rules, the bill would not seem “some kind of ogre before them”.

Indeed, there can be nothing wrong with seeking to establish a more egalitarian relationship between employer and employee in Barbados, but it would be grand if we did not after all have to fall into the “amending process”, as Mr Stuart calls it, on this “landmark piece of legislation”.

Most importantly, the crystal delineation between the employer’s rights and those of the employee is critical, and thereon hinges much. In tandem with this must be the clearly understood authority and increased powers of the Chief Labour Officer under which he or she may now exercise resolution in cases or circumstances where he or she could not before.

Hopefully, the time will have come when there are no more national unsavoury disputes, stalemates and languishing inaction.