GuySuCo una­ble to pay pro­duc­ti­on bo­nus to su­gar wor­kers

Times of Suriname - - ENGELS -

Su­gar wor­kers are un­li­ke­ly to re­cei­ve any pro­duc­ti­on bo­nus this year, GAWU said Wed­nes­day. The claims of the non-pay­ment we­re ma­de yes­ter­day by the Gu­y­a­na Agri­cul­tu­ral and Ge­ne­ral Wor­kers Union (GAWU).

The union, the lar­gest su­gar union in Gu­y­a­na, ex­plai­ned that the An­nu­al Pro­duc­ti­on In­cen­ti­ve (API) was pre­vious­ly known as An­nu­al Pro­duc­ti­on Bo­nus (APB). It ca­me in­to being in 1952. The in­du­stry then was un­der pri­va­te ow­ner­ship. “This in­cen­ti­ve to a sec­ti­on of the pro­duc­ti­ve work­for­ce con­ti­nued af­ter na­ti­o­na­li­za­ti­on which took pla­ce un­der the Ad­mi­ni­stra­ti­on of L.F.S. Burn­ham who as­su­red the wor­kers on Ves­ting Day – May 26, 1976 – that their “con­di­ti­ons of em­ploy­ment shall not be less fa­vo­ra­ble.” This com­mit­ment has been ho­no­red un­til last year”, GAWU said in a sta­te­ment. Ac­cor­ding to the union, this year, from what can be de­ter­mi­ned, the Gu­y­a­na Su­gar Cor­po­ra­ti­on Inc (GuySuCo) see­min­gly did not want in the first pla­ce to even dis­cuss with the bo­nus. “The cor­po­ra­ti­on wro­te to the union see­king the ba­sis of its claim. GAWU, in res­pon­se, poin­ted out that its claim is re­la­ted to wha­te­ver quan­ti­ty of su­gar is pro­du­ced, as is al­ways, and no other fac­tor.

Fol­lo­wing the GAWU’s res­pon­se, the cor­po­ra­ti­on on No­vem­ber 24, 2016 en­ga­ged the Union in a ses­si­on. “GuySuCo’s lead per­son at the mee­ting, ap­pa­rent­ly, was in a hur­ry to con­vey to the union’s de­le­ga­ti­on from the es­ta­tes and union of­fi­ci­als that the com­pa­ny’s fi­nan­ci­al po­si­ti­on pre­clu­ded any API award.” Fur­ther­mo­re, GuySuCo ad­vi­sed that its po­si­ti­on was con­sis­tent with its no pay ri­se po­si­ti­on this year (2016).

(Kai­e­teur­news.com)

Newspapers in Dutch

Newspapers from Suriname

© PressReader. All rights reserved.