TTPost, postal union square off over 24% offer

JOEY BARTLETT and YVONNE WEBB

The TT Postal Corporation (TTPost) and the TT Postal Workers Union (TTPWU) were at loggerheads over salary negotiations on February 20, with the corporation rejecting the union's demand for an 24 per cent hike.

In a statement, TTPost said it rejected the counterproposal from TTPWU which first proposed an 18.6 per cent salary increase for the periods, 2014-2016 and 2017-2019. After TTPost refused the initial proposal, the union returned with an adjusted 24 per cent.

In an immediate counterclaim, TTPWU president David Forbes accused the management of being disingenuous, and negotiating in bad faith, denying such proposals were discussed.

TTPost said the offer does not represent a genuine proposal but rather appears to be another unfortunate and deliberate delay tactic aimed at advancing the personal agendas of the union's executive to the detriment of employees.

"Given the corporation’s prevailing circumstances, the current economic environment in the postal industry globally, and the unfeasible and unsustainable nature of the proposal, it is not in the long-term interest of the workers."

The management team stressed the proposal is not feasible given current economic conditions and the challenges the postal industry is facing globally, particularly the ongoing decline in traditional mail services. The release calls the union's original 18.6 offer wholly unrealistic.

"TTPost unequivocally dismisses the union's most recent counterproposal, as it represents an unrealistic submission and ignores the harsh realities of the current socio-economic climate in the postal industry."

TTPost said it remains committed to engaging in fair and balanced negotiations that reflect the corporation's financial realities while safeguarding the interests of its employees.

"The corporation will continue to meet at the negotiation table to pursue good faith discussions on behalf of its workforce."

In a video, sent to the media, Forbes said the union and the company were scheduled to meet on February 20 to enter into negotiations for the two collective-bargaining periods. The venue was Drew Manor, Santa Barbara Boulevard, Upper Santa Cruz.

Forbes said no discussions were entered into as they were dissatisfied with the seating arrangements for the union representatives and called for it to be rearranged, or for the company representatives to switch places with the union members.

He said both suggestions were refused, and the union chose to remain outside the building while this was being resolved.

“We never sat around the negotiating table to propose any counterproposal, yet the company released a statement without communication with the union.

“This is unbecoming of the management team and we see it as a calculated effort to frustrate the process of negotiations.”

Forbes said the company amalgamated the percentage to 24 per cent for the two periods to give it a false appearance that it was for one period.

He explained that for the first period, considering the rate of inflation, the union reduced its proposal from 20 per cent to 15 per cent. Similarly, for the second period, the asking increase was reduced to nine per cent.

“This is not proper and we are calling on the Minister of Public Utilities Marvin Gonzales to intervene and also the chairman of the board, Michael Seales to look at what is happening with this matter.”