San Fernando fishermen refuse to occupy King's Wharf facility

San Fernando fishermen are refusing to occupy the partially opened San Fernando Fishing Facility at King's Wharf, which they believe is not only inadequately prepared for them to work, but also constructed poorly for them to ply their trade.

President of the San Fernando Fishing Co-operative Society Ltd Bobby Sooklalsingh said they were instructed to occupy the facility from January 16, but when they arrived on site, they were barred from entering.

"They say that work is taking place there and you have to have your PPE (personal protective equipment) to go there."

However, he agreed, as the site was still under active construction.

"The members reject coming into this place because work is being taking place here and...you're not supposed to be going on the site when work is going on, according to OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Authority)."

During a demonstration that morning, workers were seen putting up a fence and inspecting the jetty, and a backhoe was cleaning up rubble and used materials. The guard booth was also still clearly being constructed, having nothing more than its concrete walls up.

An advisory posted on the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries' Facebook page around 4 pm on January 15 announced the partial opening of the facility – primarily access to the jetty and temporary carpark.

But the fishermen said the site was not suited to their work.

They complained the crane installed was too old and short, and coupled with the approximately three-foot increase in the height of the dock, it would be virtually impossible for them to hoist their boats out of the sea.

Some also complained that the way the jetty was constructed would also leave their boats vulnerable to damage during bad weather, owing to the absence of a breaker wall.

Fisherman Errol Ranghill said the 64 boat owners were worse off at the new facility than at their previous location, especially with the terms and conditions they would have to sign on to.

He said they would need to sign a document that absolved the facility from any liability should their boats be damaged in bad weather, and owners would be liable to replace their lockers if someone broke into them.

"It come like we give up where we born and grow to come here to rent. Not even squat, you know, to rent. We give up we 'land' to come here to rent and (for) anything they could kick you out."

The fishermen were moved from their previous location to facilitate the land-reclamation project back in July. They were compensated by the State during the six months they were unable to work, up until January 15.

Clinton Lochan, San Fernando Fishing Co-operative Society vice president, said the fishermen refused to occupy any partially opened facility. He fears once it is occupied, it will not be completed.

Pointing to the proposed plan for the facility, he said: "We was promised this. What is the problem? We agree to this. We leave a place up there for them to backfill and...we ain't get it. Why? Give we answers."

He argued if the managing company, Udecott, knew the project would take longer than the planned six months, fishermen should have been informed so they could make proper arrangements.

"Here have about two months again before it complete. Might be more, too."

Sooklalsingh said the agreement the fishermen signed entitled them to additional compensation if the project was delayed. However, he said they were not allowed to disclose how much money they received.

One fisherman estimated they could lose between $1,000 to $1,500 daily when they did not cast their nets.

Udecott chairman: No more $ for compensation

However, in response to their concerns, Udecott chairman Noel Garcia told Newsday the demonstration on January 16 was a storm in a teacup.

After visiting the site, he said he was satisfied the fishermen could use the site.

"The issues that they are raising, in my view, make absolutely no sense.

"The jetty is completed. The lights have been installed, the slipway is there, the storage facility is completed and there is nothing to stop the fishermen from utilising the site.

"I would urge them to go back to plying their trade, because the monies that we paid them to stay home for six months while we fix the facility, (we) no longer have any money in that budget. So the longer they stay out would be to their detriment."

He added that the new $32 million facility was "far superior" to what they had before. He said the old facility had no jetty and no electricity for six years.

"What they are getting is an ultra-modern facility and when the other half is completed, which will be completed by February 15, they would have modern cold-storage facilities, ice-making facilities, (and) a commercial outlet where they can sell to the consumer."

Responding to questions from Newsday, Udecott's communications department said it was not aware of any instance when the fishermen were prevented from accessing the site.

On complaints about the crane, the company said: "The fishermen have not attempted to use the crane and, therefore, their statement cannot be confirmed. Once the crane is in use and adjustments are made it will be done."

While Lochan was concerned work might not be completed, Udecott said the contractor was obligated to complete all work to be fully paid.

The corporation was unable to comment on concerns over the terms and conditions for the fishermen, as that arrangement was with the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries.