Works and Engineering Minister Alex Scott told workers of construction firm BermudaTech that they may have ruined any chance they had of winning the Berkeley Institute contract after marching through the streets in protest.

The builders took to the streets to publicise their concerns over the way Government was handling the bidding process for the $70 million project.

Despite putting in the lowest bid of $65 million for the job, and having experience of building other schools on the Island, the second lowest bidder Pro-Active is believed to be the favoured choice with an estimate of $70 million.

Yesterday, with banners raised high above their heads, and singing "we shall not be moved'', they achieved their goal in publicising their unrest to the people of Bermuda and tourists.

But when foreman Wayne Furbert presented the workers' written concerns to Mr.

Scott outside Parliament, they were met with little sympathy.

The minister said he totally defended the workers' right to march, but said they must have known something he did not because no decision had yet been announced on who will complete the work.

He added: "Should your company be in consideration, your actions today certainly would be seen to many as prejudicial against your interests.

MPs debate contract -- Page 4 Workers confront minister "We have followed all the tenets of tendering in the most judicial way.'' And the minister said he had to be careful what else he said because the owners of BermudaTech were considering taking legal action if they failed to win the contract.

President of the company Jonathan Baxter said he believed Government had an "ulterior motive'' in granting the contract to Pro-Active.

And there have been claims in the Press that Government was under huge pressure to give the contract to Pro-Active because some of the firm's principals were heavily entrenched in the Progressive Labour Party.

But yesterday, both Mr. Scott and Government backbencher Derrick Burgess, who is also leader of the Bermuda Industrial Union, said the workers would have been better represented if they had been unionised.

Mr. Scott said: "What I would suggest is that if you are organised, if you are members of the union...you could stand up and discuss this with the union.'' Mr. Scott said it was his aim to get as many Bermudians working on Berkeley as possible, and that meant sub-contracting firms also had to be taken into consideration.

Worker Mr. Furbert presented a list of written concerns to Mr. Scott.

At the top asked the question: "Why would Government spend $5 million of taxpayers money unnecessarily?'' It also asked Mr. Scott to explain what he meant when he told The Royal Gazette that one of the bidders was more local than the others.

Mr. Furbert said 98 percent of BermudaTech were locals.

He also asked why it was taking Government so long to announce who the contractor was.

He added: "I don't think the march has hurt BermudaTech's chances because it's not BermudaTech marching, it's the workers.'' And he said it was wrong for Government to suggest they join a union, claiming the union had not encouraged them to join. That was later denied by Mr.

Burgess.

He added: "We don't feel that we need to join a union. The union has nothing to do with this matter.'' Opposition Labour and Home Affairs Minister Michael Dunkley accused Mr. Scott of treating the workers with "callous disregard'' yesterday.

"This is not a union issue. It's not a Government job to get people involved in the union,'' he said.

"And I think it's vindictive of the minister to say that the march may have jeopardised their chances of getting the contract.

"It seems to be a continuing policy of Government -- be it at your peril to criticise Government.''