By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) president yesterday denied the governing party’s assertions that he was made a King’s Counsel (KC) as an agreed reward for signing their pre-election labour pact.

Obie Ferguson KC yesterday vehemently denied to Tribune Business that there was “a quid pro quo arrangement” after the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), in a statement blasting the withdrawal of the TUC and its affiliates from the upcoming annual Labour Day parade, asserted that he had “personally benefited” from their Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).

Amid the escalating row over the TUC’s decision, unveiled by Mr Ferguson on Monday, the PLP asserted it was “false” and “contrary to the truth” for the latter to state that the Labour Day withdrawal is based on the Government’s failure to fulfill the terms and conditions set out in the MoU that was signed just one month before the September 2021 general election. 

Describing this as a “pretext for the boycott”, the governing party made a thinly-veiled suggestion that Mr Ferguson was recommended for, and became, a King’s Counsel - a status all attorneys aspire to - as a reward for himself and the TUC signing-up to the MoU. “Mr Ferguson has at the very least personally benefited from the MoU. He was named a King’s Counsel as a result of the MoU,” the PLP alleged.

The TUC president, hitting back, yesterday accused the governing party of seeking to smear his reputation in the aftermath of Monday’s announcement. Pointing out that the MoU’s text made no mention of him being made a KC in return for signing it, he also denied that there were any discussions about this with the then-Opposition and said he gained this status based on his legal performance.

“You have a copy of the MoU and that certainly is not in there,” Mr Ferguson said of the KC appointment claims. “Certainly, to me, it was not part of the discussion... If you look at the MoU it says what we agreed to. It says what was signed off by the [now] prime minister and Fred Mitchell, and what was signed off by me and my officers.

“I don’t know, and I’m not privy to, any discussions the MoU or aware of where there was a quid pro quo arrangement. I’m not aware of that. I thought that [the KC status] was based on my performance before the Privy Council, dating back 20 years, and the local court system. That was what I was made to believe they considered.”

Asked whether he believed the governing party was seeking to smear him, given the complaints and criticisms he had voiced over the Government’s alleged failure to abide by much of the MoU, Mr Ferguson replied: “That’s exactly what they’re trying to do, but it’s going to be difficult. My concern has always been the interests of the workers win, lose or draw.

“I don’t quite understand how they reconcile that with my performance at the Privy Council. I find that difficult to figure out. It was certainly not part of the MoU.” Mr Ferguson reiterated that the TUC’s Labour Day withdrawal was not intended as a personal attack on either Philip Davis KC, Pia Glover-Rolle, minister of labour and the public service, or the administration as he pledged to resolve the MoU concerns.

“What we intend to do over the next couple of months is to work with the Prime Minister to get these issues resolved,” Mr Ferguson said, striking a more conciliatory tone while renewing his long-standing call for a $90 per week, or 34.6 percent, increase in the present minimum wage to $350.

“The minimum wage at $260 per week, we’re saying that’s unreasonable, that’s unconscionable,” he blasted. “All we are asking for is that we came to an agreement; an agreement to move it towards $350.... We’ll start with the MoU. That’s what we signed off on, and what myself and my colleagues are working on.

“Two hundred and sixty dollars per week ain’t going to cut it. No Bahamian worker would disagree with that. We want $350 at a bare minimum, and we want to work towards it. It don’t have to come tomorrow morning. They’re trying to smear the situation with the people involved.”

Michael Pintard, the Opposition leader, in a statement last night asserted that the PLP’s suggestion Mr Ferguson was made a KC in return for signing the MoU was “an extraordinary and deeply troubling admission”.

“The PLP’s statement about the granting of the King’s Counsel is an open confession to a transactional use of state honours. If true, this would represent an egregious abuse of public trust and a disturbing violation of the independent and merit-based nature of national titles, including one as significant as King’s Counsel,” the FNM leader blasted.

“Labour leaders have rightly objected to Labour Day being used as a political launch pad, especially as the PLP has failed to honour its own MoU. The politicisation is not only disrespectful; it exposes a troubling disregard for labour’s independence and a lack of political maturity.” 

The PLP, in its statement “denouncing” the call for a Labour Day parade boycott on June 6, said: “Mr Ferguson’s call will do injury to the workers and is not in their best interests. From the inception of Labour Day and the labour movement, the PLP has stood with labour.

“The PLP views work as dignified, and a worthy and necessary pursuit. Furthermore, we uphold the rights of workers. This is enshrined in our party’s constitution. We and labour are one.... We call on Mr Ferguson to resile from his call for a boycott and participate in the march as scheduled. 

The pact between the PLP and two umbrella union bodies, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and National Congress of Trades Unions of The Bahamas (NCTUB), committed the party to multiple fundamental labour-friendly reforms if it won the Government following the September 2021 general election.

For instance, the MoU “pledged” a PLP government to raising the redundancy cap to 24 months through changes to the Employment Act once elected. And, as “a matter of fundamental principle”, it committed a PLP government to “declaring its unequivocal support for trade unions in the workplace, including automatic agency shop”.

Agency shop, which is viewed as protecting a union’s security, would result in non-union members in a particular workplace paying service fees to the union to cover costs associated with collective bargaining agreements the latter secures.

Agency shop agreements are highly-regulated in developed countries, and the US Supreme Court in 2018 ruled that such deals are invalid in the public sector for that country. However, the PLP-union MoU committed both sides to altering the Employment Act’s section 42 such that agency shop becomes “automatic” once a trade union is recognised as the sole bargaining agent for a workplace.

Other areas where the unions and the now-government agreed to work together included changing laws and regulations “where necessary and possible”, such as “allowing for at least 16 hours of rest between shifts for each employee”.

They also committed to “redefine wages to include all forms of income, including tips and gratuities”, and to look at several other potential changes to the Employment Act. These include amending section 26 (4), so that employees are entitled to redundancy pay, gratuity and a pension in cases where the employer provides a non-contributory pension.

And the PLP-union MoU also commits the parties to assessing if the Act’s section 29 can be changed so that redundancy/dismissal is based on wages instead of basic pay. The document also committed the now-government to formally consulting the unions before permits and tax breaks/concessions are granted to foreign investors, and to using its “good offices” to ensure industrial agreements in all sectors are reached.

Both sides also agreed to “work towards the enactment of a livable wage”, although no details were given, as well as passing a National Redundancy Fund Act and enabling the Industrial Tribunal’s rulings “to be enforced without delay” rather than litigants having to seek their implementation via the Supreme Court.

The MoU extended well beyond pure labour-related matters, too, calling for the PLP and unions to work on a National Pension Act and Culture, Heritage, Art & Entertainment Encouragement Act. The two parties also agreed to fully implement National Health Insurance (NHI), including hospital and catastrophic care.

In addition, the PLP and umbrella unions agreed that “the heads of registered trade unions and their secretary-generals or designates should be Justices of the Peace”, while a Davis-led administration would also provide the TUC and NCTUB each with “a parcel of land” - presumably Crown Land - upon which each can build their respective headquarters buildings.