Why is it that every time a company has to dismiss staff for wrong doing that company is vilified and the Union chooses to step in, only encouraging people in a lot of foolishness?
1)Royal Shop staff member is told/asked to work in the Port. She refuses. She is dismissed. Clearly she didn’t want her job, fine. Then her co-workers decided they liked her so they went on a wildcat strike without the Union’s sanction. They too were dismissed as is the nature of how things are done in such a situation. What’s the big deal? The big deal is the Union has filled people with a sense of entitlement that any degree of wrong is lauded and they should NEVER be subject to reprimand.
2) Sandy Lane guest alleges 17,000 in Euros went missing from their room. The police were called in, a staff member was simply asked by police to go down to the station for questioning, he went, was questioned, then went home. Staff went on a wildcat strike, were dismissed. He still has his job, was never arrested and now his name is all over the media because of his overzealous co-workers. Again, the Union is intervening to reinstate the rule-breakers.
My issues are these:
- Wildcat Strikers are subject to dismissal.
- In the Royal Shop case the girl at the center was wrong and in the Sandy Lane case, no great social injustice was committed against anyone.
- There have been times when the Union COULD and SHOULD have intervened for a worthy cause and did NOTHING.
- Often the Union only steps in when they KNOW media coverage will be at its highest. Fame whoring.
- Why now is all of corporate Barbados being held hostage by its workers? That is pure nonsense. I am in support of workers’ rights but the union comes in to muck up operations and grind companies to a halt over lawlessness. Then they turn around and wonder why companies don’t want staff unionized. It has nothing to do with wanting to unfair people it has to do with the Union’s track record of dealing with situations.
If it were my company, I would shut it down first.