WICLU President Claire Elshot on the scene supporting the workers.
PHILIPSBURG--Operations at the TelEm Group ground to a halt for several hours Wednesday morning after workers downed tools and walked over to the Government Building to silently protest the contents of a letter received by management regarding cost-cutting measures.
TelEm Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Kendall Dupersoy told The Daily Herald during the walkout that the workers’ actions had brought the company’s operations to a standstill.
The workers eventually returned to the job after 11:00am following a meeting between representatives of their union and the labour mediator at the Government Building.
Following this meeting, union representative Nataly Frans told workers that she would advise that no cuts be accepted unless the union receives the law authorising the cut in black and white, until it is shown how the funds from the cuts will be transferred from TelEm to government’s coffers, and which entity will benefit from the funds.
The workers’ ire was ignited after the union received a letter from Dupersoy dated February 12 and shared it with members. In that letter, Dupersoy referred to previous correspondence in which the company elaborated on the government-imposed measure to reduce labour conditions of employees resulting in a reduction of 12.5 per cent.
“In the meantime, this measure has been laid down in draft legislation which is expected to enter into force in the very short term. In the draft legislation, a measure is also included that as of the calendar year 2021 any increases will no longer be allowed,” Dupersoy said in the letter.
“Since the draft legislation is not clear on how the reductions can or should be applied, we have requested both the government and the CFT [Committee for Financial Supervision – Ed.] in writing to provide clarity. We have not received a response from CFT and the response from the government does not give us the required comfort.
“Considering the existing uncertainties, we have suggested to you on numerous occasions to wait with introducing the cost-cutting measures so that any and all uncertainties can first be clarified. You have indicated not to want to wait any longer and this is also causing unrest among our employees.
“In light of the above, at your explicit continued request, we are willing to already introduce the cost-cutting measures and have selected the following: reduction of five vacation days as of the year 2021; elimination of the savings plan as of 1 January 2021; the profit share bonus over the year 2019 and payable in the year 2020 will not be paid; the year-end bonus for the year 2020 will not be paid; the on-call allowance will be reduced to zero as of 1 January 2021; the vacation allowance for 2021 will be reduced by 60 per cent.”
He said the company reserved the right to amend these measures if it receives confirmation that the measures selected are not applied correctly and/or if the actual figures (payroll cost) for the period July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, turn out to be higher, which could result in an obligation for the employees to pay back if what they received is less than a 12.5 per cent reduction in total.
“Should the latter be the case, the company will be lenient and will give the employees the possibility to pay back what they received in excess over an extended period of time (so not at once). Further, please be advised that these measures will be applied across the board and will thus also be applied to executive management.
“Finally, since pursuant to above-mentioned (draft) legislation, increases will no longer be allowed effective this calendar year, the salary increases and merit max bonuses that have been processed in the January 2021 payroll will have to be reversed, which will be done effective February 2021.
“The excess amounts received by the employees will have to be paid back. To accommodate the employees as much as possible, the excess amounts received can be paid back over an extended period of 12 months.”
SMCU followed up with a letter to Dupersoy dated February 12 in which it referred to the CEO’s correspondence as being “shockingly disrespectful.” The union said the CEO has “once again demonstrated by means of your autocratic letter that you are unwilling and/or incapable of negotiating in good faith with the SMCU.”
“For the umpteenth we are forced to remind you that the SMCU is the legal representative of the employees of TelEm. This means that you are obligated to speak to the union pertaining to any and all matters pertaining to their labour conditions. This is even more so the case when it pertains to oppressive measures that are detrimental to these workers who represent the true backbone of TelEm.
“Government has not imposed any measures to reduce our labour conditions. The draft legislation was not sent to you with any instructions to reduce or cut any salaries and secondary benefits of the employees. Your wish to take such action at this time is unlawful,” SMCU said. “The board of the SMCU remains willing to sit with you and discuss any and all measures when it becomes a law. Until then you have no jurisdiction nor power to make any cuts from the employees’ salaries or secondary benefits.”
SMCU “strongly” urged Dupersoy to adhere to the existing labour laws and refrain from bringing unrest among the employees by constantly threatening them with “illegal deductions.”
In another correspondence to the union dated February 17, Dupersoy said that when he sent the February 12 letter, it had been his interpretation that the union would contact him to discuss the matter.
“However, instead of coming to me, you approached the office of the Prime Minister. I don’t know what the intention was, using this approach, but for clarity, since you did not see the letter as an invitation to discuss, I hereby officially invite you to discuss the letter. It would also be beneficial if you can bring along some of your members so that the explanation can be given to them at the same time,” Dupersoy said.
In another follow-up letter he accused the union of being disrespectful, bullying, making untrue statements, being autocratic and publishing private letters, amongst other things. He said that as the union had addressed the issue with the government mediator, management would adhere to the rules and engage in the process.
“In the meantime, I request your indulgence that no additional payments will be made until such time that you are satisfied that the law is active and the negotiated measures can be applied. Your acceptance of this condition is very important, because if any payments are made during this time, the impact on our colleagues when you are satisfied that the law is active will have extremely negative effects on us.
“I hope that you will in the future refrain from making the untrue statement that I am not willing to negotiate, just because I do not adhere to your wishes.”
