Attempt to force negotiations for 2019-2023 pay hike: High Court has no jurisdiction to grant GTU’s applications – Judge rules
- Home
- News
Days after the Guyana Teachers’ Union (GTU) approached the High Court asking for the court, among other things, to order the Government to negotiate salary increases for teachers for the period 2019 to 2023, Justice Sandil Kissoon on Tuesday ruled that the court has no such jurisdiction.
The GTU approached the High Court last week with an application filed by its Attorney, Darren Wade, asking the court for a number of remedies, among which was ordering the Government to engage in collective bargaining for salaries for 2019 to 2023.
The Union had also asked the Court that Chief Education Officer Saddam Hussain and Education Ministry Permanent Secretary Shannielle Hoosein-Outar be held in contempt of court, for “unwillingness and bad faith for refusing to discuss collective bargaining for the period 2019-2023”.
In return, Government responded with an application to strike out that application filed by the Union.
Calling the application frivolous and an abuse of the process of the Court, Attorney General Anil Nandlall told Guyana Times> that there were many deficiencies which plagued the GTU’s application.
“The court quickly realised that we were right and that the application filed by [the GTU] was hopeless, misconceived, and utterly wrong. The court invited Wade to explain why he filed what he filed, seeking to expand the case.
One can expand a case that is ongoing, but you have to follow the proper procedure. You have to apply for an amendment and amend your case to accommodate the new reliefs that you’re seeking. That was not done. Secondly, you have to ask the court for reliefs that the court can grant.
You can ask the court to make final reliefs in an interlocutory application,” the AG related.
The court granted Wade leave to withdraw his application, and highlighting ‘inconsistencies’ put forward by both sides, Justice Kissoon ordered both sides to produce documents of previous engagements between the Government and GTU.
Nandlall explained, “We have undertaken to produce the documents which the Judge is asking for, but, in my view, those documents do not advance the case. This is not a case where the factual collision will impact upon the law. The law is very simple. If you do not work, you do not get paid. And the Government is free not to offer voluntary service.”
The substantive case brought by the GTU against the Education Ministry is fixed for hearing today.
Nandlall positioned, “I am convinced that the law is clear and that we should succeed. I don’t think this matter depends on a great amount of evidence. These are pure legal issues.”
In court documents filed by the GTU (applicant) in February 2024 against the Attorney General of Guyana (respondent), the Union disclosed that only non-financial matters were discussed with the Education Ministry regarding its multi-year proposal for the period 2019-2023 that was submitted to Government in September 2020.
However, Chief Education Officer Hussain, in his affidavit to the court, pointed out that from August 11, 2020 until January 31, 2024, the GTU and the Ministry met continuously – on average once monthly, sometimes as many as three times per month. Those meetings, he noted, dealt with the demands of the applicant as well as demands of the Ministry regarding the general welfare and well-being of teachers and the best interests of the education sector.
Hussain further explained that the Ministry “successfully and satisfactorily” addressed 30 of the 41 proposals made by the applicant in the past three years, and of the 11 outstanding requests, two are specifically only to benefit GTU executive members, while two others cannot be granted because they are contrary to the laws of Guyana. (G12)
https://guyanatimesgy.com/attempt-to-force-negotiations-for-2019-2023-pay-hike-high-court-has-no-jurisdiction-to-grant-gtus-applications-judge-rules/
