The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Hotel union executives last night said a Supreme Court justice had effectively cleared the way for it to take a strike vote tomorrow over its gratuity dispute with the Melia Nassau Beach Resort.

While the injunction banning the union and its executives from any illegal action remains in place, Darren Woods, its general secretary, told Tribune Business that Justice Roy Jones had “given permission” for tomorrow’s vote.

The union, plus the Melia’s operator and its Baha Mar owner, will have to return to court next Wednesday for a further hearing before Justice Roy Jones over whether that injunction should be removed or varied.

However, speaking after yesterday’s hearing before Justice Jones, Mr Woods said the strike vote could proceed because the hotel union was following the law when it came to holding such a poll.

“We have to go back to court on Wednesday, but the judge has given permission for us to take a strike vote on Friday,” Mr Woods told Tribune Business.

“He [the judge] cannot not allow it to happen because we have followed the position in law. While they work out the legal side of it, the union side of it is still going on.”

Mr Woods expressed confidence that the Bahamas Hotel, Catering and Allied Workers Union (BHCAWU) members would vote in favour of strike action, with the poll set to be taken at Workers House tomorrow between 8am and 5pm.

Robert Sands, Baha Mar’s senior vice-president of government and external affairs, also confirmed to Tribune Business last night that the two sides have to go back before Justice Jones for a hearing on the ‘illegal industrial action’ injunction next Wednesday.

He said nothing further, but earlier issued a statement calling on the hotel union to stop “grandstanding” and reach an agreement to end the Melia gratuity dispute.

Mr Sands was responding after the Melia late on Tuesday released eight ‘probationary’ workers who had failed to come up to the required performance standard during their trial period.

He said claims that this was “retaliation” over the gratuity dispute were “simply not the truth”, pointing out that Melia took no action against staff who breached their employment terms by participating in two illegal December work stoppages.

Pointing out that most of the 80 staff hired recently by Melia remain with the resort, Mr Sands said: “Melia calls upon the union leadership to stop with the rhetoric and grandstanding, and resolve this situation as soon as possible so that we may distribute the all-inclusive gratuities to employees. We remain prepared and ready to meet to end this difficult situation.”

Mr Woods, though, yesterday said the union’s concern was not the lay-offs, but that Baha Mar/Melia had allegedly changed the terms for probationary terms.

He claimed that Melia was now using a 90-day probationary period to assess new staff, which was different to the four-week timeframe specified in the industrial agreement both sides say they continue to adhere to.

Still, the hotel union’s ability to proceed with the strike vote has given it back some negotiating leverage, which appeared totally lost when Baha Mar obtained the Christmas Eve injunction blocking illegal industrial action.

The resort developer appeared to hold all the cards, its tactic of paying all due gratuities into escrow a tactic designed to seemingly squeeze the hotel union by building pressure on its members to force it into an agreement on gratuities.

“They’re hoping the employees will say we’ve gone as far as we can go, and will say ‘sign’,” Mr Woods told Tribune Business. “We won’t sign anything that’s not in the best interest of the members, no matter how hard it gets, because at the end of the day it comes back to bite.”

Baha Mar/Melia’s position has been that it had no choice to adopt the stance it did, after 10 months of negotiations with the hotel union failed to produce an agreement it regards as essential to keeping the resort “economically viable”.

To facilitate the Melia’s transition to a more all-inclusive model, the operator and Baha Mar have wanted to reduce the gratuity rate from 15 per cent to 8 per cent in those areas - a move that would have a drastic impact on take-home pay for employees working there.

Mr Woods yesterday said the probationary worker lay-offs were another attempt to “break the back of the employees, the spirit of the employees”.

While this was not succeeding, the hotel union general secretary questioned whether “one of the underlying objectives” was to remove the hotel union from the Melia and the resorts that form part of Baha Mar’s $3.5 billion development.

“All their behaviour indicates that’s what they’re attempting to do,” Mr Woods told Tribune Business, adding that the union was “not worried” because employees - not the employer - ultimately determined whether they became unionised.

“If we have all these problems before the new resort opens, imagine what will happen after it opens,” Mr Woods added.

He said Melia employees were not receiving the gratuity portion due on the resort’s all-inclusive areas, with the full sum last received the week before Christmas.

Acknowledging the “serious impact” to Melia staff because of how heavily gratuities weighed in their take home pay, Mr Woods said the resort was pushing the reduced 8 per cent gratuity rate because it wanted to increase its all-inclusive component from 50 per cent to 85 per cent of the property.

Mr Woods said staff were now only receiving gratuities on the 15 per cent of the Melia that remains ‘European plan’, with the balance being held in escrow.

“You can imagine losing 85 per cent of your supporting income,” he added.