The Industrial Court has dismissed an industrial relations offence (IRO) brought by the Public Services Association (PSA) against the National Insurance Board (NIB) over its alleged failure to honour the terms of a collective agreement signed in late 2020.
Delivering a written judgement on Tuesday, Industrial Court Judges Herbert Soverall, Patrick Rabathaly and Melvin Daniel rejected the IRO, which was filed by the union last year.
The panel ruled that the union could not prove the NIB intended to breach the agreement by failing to pay salary arrears and increases because the delay was due to the Ministry of Finance not approving an increased budget to cover the payments.
“The disclosures of the employer show that it had to obtain the approval of its budgetary allocations before it can effect payments and that it had persistently and consistently applied orally and in writing to the Ministry of Finance for approval of the necessary funds to effect the terms of the collective agreement,” it said.
“On the basis of that disclosure which the union has not challenged, it can be inferred that the employer made every attempt to obtain the funding to effect the payments and as such, it had every intention to effect the payments,” the panel added.
According to the court filings, the agreement for the period 2014 to 2016, which gave workers a total salary increase of nine per cent (a three per cent per year), was signed on October 26, 2020.
Under the agreement, which required the NIB to make retroactive payments to eligible employees by December 31 last year, workers were also given increases in their paternity leave, car and car repair loans and travel allowances. Their Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) was also increased to $220.
“To date, NIB has failed to pay the revised salary and allowances along with the retroactive payments. Accordingly, the PSA submits that they (NIB) have fundamentally violated the terms of this collective agreement,” then PSA president Watson Duke said.
Through the industrial relations offence, the union was seeking to compel the NIB to abide by the terms of the agreement. It is also seeking compensation for employees who would have relied on it to apply for loans and subsequently defaulted.
The collective agreement was raised in Parliament in March last year.
Responding to a question posed by Opposition Senator Wade Mark, Finance Minister Colm Imbert said his ministry was seeking advice on the issue.
“The consequences of the agreement are also far-reaching and could result in tremendous expense to taxpayers if used as a precedent,” Imbert said, as he described the matter as complicated.
Imbert noted that in March 2011, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance wrote to the NIB chairman and indicated that the Human Resource Advisory Committee of the Cabinet would monitor all wage and salary negotiations.
The collective agreement was not authorised by the ministerial committee, according to Imbert.
Imbert suggested that if the NIB agreement was applied to all workers in the entire public sector, it would cost taxpayers approximately $7 billion.
When the PSA brought the application it was initially dismissed, as the court ruled that it was filed under the wrong section of the Industrial Relations Act. The application was refiled and was heard by the court in August last year.
NIB was represented by Christopher Sieuchand, Sashi Indarsingh and Anderson Modeste, of MG Daly and Associates.
