The term 'reasonable' is often used in industrial relations, particularly in reference to actions or reactions to trade disputes and gives rise to the question, which, if a decision is to depend on it, seems to be a 'reasonable' question: 'What, exactly, is 'reasonableness'?'

It was used, for example, in Industrial Court Award TD 175 of 2000, speaking of the obligation of an employer not to refuse the request of a worker who has been given 45 days' notice of retrenchment, for 'reasonable' time off from his job in order to explore the possibility of alternative employment.

This seemingly vague concept, 'reasonableness,' comes from English common law, on which much of our labour law was originally based. It is often explained by using the circular definition: 'reasonableness is what is reasonable to the reasonable man,' which to most people sounds like robber talk.

"The 'reasonable man' is a fictional person with an ordinary degree of reason, prudence, care, foresight, or intelligence whose conclusion, or expectation in relation to most things is used as an objective standard by which to measure or determine something."

This could be whether an act was negligent - such as failure to make sure a turbine had no one inside cleaning it before turning it on, for example, or a failure to clean up an oil spill on stairs used by employees.

So what it comes down to is 'what could be considered reasonable in the circumstances?' Or would the average person on the Brian Lara Promenade think that, in the circumstances, the action of the employer or the employee was 'reasonable'?

So the standard of the reasonable man is really 'common sense,' intended to be impersonal and independent of the person who is accused of negligence, and independent of the accuser's emotional state.

As a result, Section 16 of the Retrenchment and Severance Benefits Act gives the responsibility of deciding on 'reasonableness' to the Industrial Court or the Recognition Board where it is in dispute, as would a matrimonial court have the responsibility where it is a domestic issue.

What, then, to 'take in front before in front takes you,' should a reasonable employee expect from a reasonable employer?

First, the employee should expect the employer to honour the terms and conditions of the contract or letter of employment, usually set out in or alongside the collective agreement and the policy and procedure manual (if these exist), as well as provisions set out in the labour legislation of TT and any promises made during the recruitment process.

An employer is also expected to understand that although it is not expressly stated in the Industrial Relations Act, employees, under common law have certain 'reasonable rights' such as:

• Once fairly employed, the right to a job and to the remuneration agreed upon, subject to the law and to the employees' agreement to change.

• The right to expect an employer to take 'reasonable' care for the safety of all employees and to provide the necessary material and psychological conditions in wh