CLYDE WEATHERHEAD

IN HIS budget speech last week, the Minister of Finance once again dragged the negotiations in the public service from the negotiating table and into the arena of politics in the Parliament.

After basically repeating the CPO's position to the public service associations and unions that four per cent was the Government's final position, Colm Imbert said:

"On the other hand, if trade unions choose to send these negotiations to the Industrial Court, we would ask that these matters be expedited, so that we can act swiftly in accordance with the court's decision."

First of all, the only party in these negotiations threatening to "send these negotiations' to a third party is the CPO - and the Finance Minister who instructs him.

Secondly, public service negotiations are not sent to the Industrial Court.

The dispute procedure for public service negotiations is spelled out in the Civil Service Act and not in the IRA.

The Industrial Court is created by the Industrial Relations Act, Ch 88:01. The Special Tribunal is created by the Civil Service Act, Ch 23:01.

If there is a breakdown in negotiations between the CPO and the associations/unions, the dispute is reported to the same Minister of Finance who instructs the CPO on Government's position (section 17 Ch 23:01).

After 21 days in which the minister is not required to do anything, 'the minister shall refer the dispute for settlement to the Special Tribunal established under section 21 within 21 days from the date on which the dispute was reported to him' (section 20 Ch 23:01).

So the first person to 'send these negotiations' to the Special Tribunal is the Finance Minister himself. If he does not, then the association may refer it.

So the Finance Minister is the principal who directs the agent, the CPO, in the negotiations and then is the one to whom a dispute is referred first. Two bites at the cherry.

Thirdly, public service negotiation disputes are not referred to the Industrial Court; they are referred to the Special Tribunal.

The Finance Minister knows that. The CPO knows that and the Public Service Association leaders know that.

So this confusion of the Special Tribunal with the Industrial Court by the minister has to be deliberate.

Special Tribunal not

the Industrial Court

This is not the first time this deliberate confusion is being raised in the context of public service negotiations.

In 1993, similar confusion was being created and in a letter of October 23, 1993, to the newspapers, titled 'Our dilemma - legal action and the pay arrears issue,' I explained the difference and quoted the IRA, the Civil Service Act and High Court judgment in ten per cent pay-cut case by Justice A Warner extensively.

I again quote the learned judge in case anyone doubts what I am saying: "An award of the Special Tribunal is not an award of the Industrial Court."

The Minister of Finance in his letter to Mr Camdessus of the International Monetary Fund, in which reference was made to the award of the Special Tribunal