Whose mandate, Mr President?

Editor: The SVGTU has a strong democratic process that is formalized in its constitution.

As a former leader of the union, I have participated in all the union’s industrial struggles, from 1975-2008. As far as I am aware, it is the first time in the history of the union that a president has blatantly ignored the union’s decision making organs and gone outside of the union to make a decision to strike.{{more}}I have no issue with the union pursing its goal. However, to do so without the consent of the general membership is a despicable act.

From my research of the process leading up to the industrial action of last week, it is clear that this was Oswald and P John’s strike.

At the annual branch day activity, held on September 2, 2015 and attended by 53 teachers, a motion was moved by P John, mandating the National Executive to explore the possibility of a one-off one-month payment.

The president did not ask for the motion to be seconded, nor did he put the issue to the vote; in essence P John’s motion became the union’s mandate.

To give Oswald his due, the National Executive organized a series of branch meetings to mobilize teachers to support the issue. The numbers at these meeting speak for themselves: Leeward branches – 12 teachers in attendance; Kingstown branches – 22 teachers and Windward branches – four teachers. Clearly these numbers are an indication, to any level headed leader, that he has work to do to sell his proposal.

The president, realizing that he did not have the support of the majority of members on the National Executive for a premeditated strike, bypassed all the decision making organs of the union – National Executive, National General Council and General Meeting.

In the Interim, P John circulated a letter to all the members of the National Executive, praising Oswald’s efforts and castigating those executive members who he deemed were not supporting the president.

He also informed the president that he had spoken with the Hon Leader of the Opposition and had set up a meeting with him and the National Executive. When the president called the Leader of the Opposition, he was told by the Opposition Leader that he was unaware of any such meeting. Is that not politics?

At a joint meeting held with the PSU on October 7, Sis Jackson Lewis asked that it be recorded in the minutes that she will not participate in any strike action, unless it was agreed to by the wider membership of the union, in keeping with the constitution of the union. For advocating the correct position, she was verbally abused. Is that a despicable act?

In the 2000 unrest, decisions taken at ODD’s meetings were not implemented by the Executive until they were endorsed by teachers at a general meeting. Teachers were not on strike!

Oswald, you were carrying out the mandate given to you by P John and the timing of such interventions is clearly an effort by Mr John to influence the national polls in favour of one party. I have no issue with political agendas, but don’t accuse others when you are playing the same game.

P John, Oswald, and his cohort should do the honourable thing and resign for carrying out a strike without obtaining a mandate from the members of the union.

Deniston Douglas