By RICARDO WELLS

Tribune Staff Reporter

rwells@tribunemedia.net

MINISTER of Labour and National Insurance Shane Gibson yesterday continued his defence of the government’s decision to present, delay and then pass labour law amendments in little under two weeks, insisting that the series of moves was not politically motivated or driven.

Speaking as a guest on “The Real Deal” with host Ortland Bodie, Mr Gibson moved to clarify what he termed a continuous push to present the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) as manoeuvring to win over unions, claiming that his ministerial agenda had always viewed the amendments first presented to Parliament late last month as “major pieces of labour legislation”.

The Golden Gates MP, in response to questions over the rushed nature of the amendments, argued that the stigma was only being pushed by disgruntled employers who “gained their success riding on the backs of employees”.

Mr Gibson maintained that the changes were being criticised to give the perception that the Christie administration “deceived or short-changed” employers.

He accused some employers of intentionally trying to delay the “necessary and essential” changes, implying that at every step of the process, he and other officials attempted to facilitate demands and concerns raised by the group.

“What should we do? Say we are not going to pass the bills? If you watched the news over the past year, every time they interviewed me and asked when was this legislation (was) coming, I said as soon as I get it form the Tripartite Council.

“And so the minute we got that, we had to have them draft (the amendments) properly, we had to send it to the Attorney General’s Office, we had to allow it to go to Cabinet so that Cabinet could agree to it; and of course we had to table it in Parliament and review it before you debated it,” Mr Gibson said.

“My point is this … it was the employers, who last year around September, asked me for an additional three months because they wanted an opportunity to really get all of their references and look at what was happening in the region as to how we should modify and amend the Employment Act and the Industrial Relations Act.

“(They) asked for the extension, so I accommodated them. And now, I am being asked why would you rush this? These are major pieces of legislation and so my point is, it only happen (this slowly) because this is when we got them,” the former unionist said.

Enshrined in former legislation was language that loosely suggested that private sector employers adhere to industrial practices laid out by the government. The new legislation now mandates those terms and practices.

Mr Gibson said this change ensures that employers now have to give “proper notice” before moving to make employees redundant.

He said: “You know what it is for workers, after working 25-30 years or a year, to wake up one morning and to be told that effective today that you may be made redundant? So now you have to sit down with the union at least a week in advance. You have to sit down with the government at least two weeks in advance.”

Initially, the government sought to address redundancy pay to employees; options for rehiring in times of redundancies; and the implementation of provisions that protect employees in the event of being made redundant.

Those proposals resulted to serious push back by private sector employers.

Ultimately, the government relented on its attempt to alter the redundancy ‘cap’, leaving it as originally stated due to uproar.

Addressing that push back last week, Mr Gibson said he expected everything that came with the process and was prepared for every possible outcome.

Many of the issues addressed in the government’s slate of labour amendments corresponded with issues contested by unionists for much of the last decade.

Several observers have suggested that these moves by the government came in response to the mass redundancy carried out by Sandal Royal Bahamian last year, when 600 lost their jobs.

The Senate passed the amendments yesterday.