A leading trade unionist feels tricked by the way his members were sold a pay agreement after being told Government was under financial strain only for the controversial increase in MPs salaries to be proposed a few months later.

President of the Bermuda Public Service Union, Armell Thomas said he was not taking issue with the size of the salary increases for politicians but the way it followed the ratification of a pay agreement for his members in February which had been kept low after he had been told by a top civil servant that Government's finances were strained.

Mr. Thomas and a BPSU negotiation team met with Financial Secretary Donald Scott in February.

"He discussed all the finances and what is happening and told me Government was in a strain right now so they can't afford to go with the percentages that we were looking for," he said.

As a result a three-year deal was struck giving a 4.5 percent increase in the first year, a four percent in the second year and the third year to be decided nearer the time.

Two months later a review of the upper levels of public service pay, those above "level 41" on annual salaries and earning at least $115,000 had their pay improved with increases up to $20,000.

But in hindsight, Mr. Thomas feels the increases for the higher grade civil servants was an early "Halloween treat" before it became apparent he had been "tricked" into accepting a lower pay rise for rank-and-file membership just before the MPs' large salary rises were proposed.

He said: "I'm disappointed in the increases of the salaries of the MPs and Senators because the Permanent Secretary had stated Government was a bind.

"I did not realise Halloween fell in July or June. But I got the treat first and then got tricked. All the senior servants above grade 41 got that increase and all the other civil servants are still to be looked at. I do not know if that initial increase was to ease my hand for these increases to the MPs."

Mr. Thomas said he is not disappointed about the actual amount MPs and the Premier are likely to receive, because he feels the salaries for Ministers has been historically low as a result of past UBP Government ministers owning outside businesses that meant they did not require an additional large salary to cover their political role.

"But today we have more ordinary persons on both parties who need supplementary funding. I have no problem with that. I was never against the increases."

Mr. Thomas said he was not sure if the salary review committee or the Premier were aware of the BPSU's pre-agreement meeting with the Financial Secretary and what they had been told about the financial state of the Government.

He added: "He took us through the books and showed us the finances of the Government. Then we had to go back and sell this stuff to our membership before the Budget debate.

But he went on: "Once bitten, twice shy. Any other negotiations that go forward I'm going to take a real slow time looking at the whole picture."

And he suggested it would have been better if a representative of the TUC had been included in the MPs salary review committee so that the unions would have been aware what was likely coming around the corner.

"If they wanted to take a team approach they should have done that," he said.

Proposed salary increases that would increase the Premier's pay by 80 percent to $200,000, and put a full-time Minister on $150,000 and a part-time Minister on $100,000 have been approved by the House of Assembly and are due to go before the Senate on July 12.