Dear Editor,
We refer to a story in your edition of Monday, November 9, 2009 under the caption ‘Strike looms at Rusal’s Aroaima operations.’
We view this story with grave concern as it is premised on an error of such magnitude as to appear provocative
.
The story claims that workers at BCGI’s Aroaima operations have threatened to go on strike if the company fails to agree to a 10% wage increase, and cites a letter from the GBGWU (Guyana Bauxite and General Workers’ Union) dated November 6, 2009 in which the writer claims the union has threatened that if the company does not agree to a 10% increase across the board retroactive to January 1, 2009 all unionized workers would proceed on strike from 6 am this Wednesday.
This is a complete fabrication as nowhere in the letter of that date from the GBGWU is there any threat of a strike.
The author of the story must have discerned from even a cursory perusal of this letter that there was never any threat of a strike made by the union. Indeed, Article 46 of the Collective Labour Agreement between the GBGWU and the company states thus:
“In view of the orderly procedure set forth in Article 11 of the Collective Labour Agreement, the Union agrees that they will not cause or direct any industrial action of any sort and the company agrees that they will not cause or direct any lockouts during the term of this Agreement. Further, no employee shall engage in any cessation of work or restriction of production during the term of the Agreement.”
The company and the union are presently engaged in very sensitive negotiations which involve the issue of wage increases. However at no point has the union issued any such illegal ultimatum as is alleged by the writer. Indeed, one of the main purposes of the CLA quoted above is to provide a comprehensive system of dispute resolution and therefore such an ultimatum would be unlawful and a breach of the CLA.
As mentioned above, this failure to check an essential fact is such a serious breach of the most elementary principles of journalism that it is difficult to envisage any responsible journalist doing so, particularly when citing a letter the writer must have seen, and this therefore leads to the almost inescapable conclusion that the writer is mischievous.
The company trusts you will publish a correction or retraction of the story and give this the same prominence as the story.
Yours faithfully,
Sergey Kostyuk
Bauxite Company of Guyana
Editor’s note
The report of November 9 was based on the statements of unionized workers and a shop steward, and not on a copy of the letter of November 6 to Rusal cited by Mr Kostyuk; this newspaper did not see a copy of that letter. We apologize for suggesting that an ultimatum had been contained in the letter.
GBGWU General Secretary (ag) Leslie Gonsalves clarified with our reporter yesterday that union representatives had told workers that if there was no response from the company to the union proposal for a 10% increase in wages by Tuesday, November 10, they would proceed on strike on Wednesday. He added that the union was not obligated to communicate this to the company. Mr Gonsalves also said that they did not have to strike since the company had responded in a letter on Monday, and union officials would be meeting Rusal representatives today. Our reporter had attempted to contact company officials before the story was published, but to no avail. The following day she did speak to Personnel Manager Elena Gorshkova, who asked that she email the questions to herself and to Mr Shipulin Dmitriy, which was done. No response has been received.
