Log In

Reset Password

Police 'angered' by new challenge

Police union members prepare to march on Parliament on June 27.

Government is to push ahead with a judicial review of an Arbitration Award to the Bermuda Police Association, setting a precedent for the future of labour relations in the country.

Legal sources last night warned that Government's Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review to the Supreme Court would cause "considerable concern among all trade unions".

The application was made by Senator David Burch, Minister of Labour, Home Affairs and Housing, on July 3 — days after Police took the historic step of marching on Parliament in protest at Government's rejection of their binding Arbitration Award.

The decision to pursue a judicial review came a day after Government resolved its dispute over the Bermuda Public Service Union's Arbitration Award — granting up to 3,000 civil servants a five percent pay increase.

Last night Detective Constable Carl Neblett, chairman of the BPA, said there was growing anger and frustration among officers. "Right now, having seen the BPSU have settled, our members are completely disgruntled by the fact that the masses have been quietened by their increases but the Police Service is still left in the lurch. There is a whole heap of anger," he said. "Why are we still here when an Award has been settled? Implement the Award."

Government is contesting three items in the Award by the Permanent Police Tribunal: making officers' Combined Allowance pensionable; the granting of Legal Aid to officers if charged with an offence on duty; and a monthly housing subsidy of $1,000 by Government to assist Bermudian officers in buying property.

The Minister's request to proceed however, must first be granted by a Supreme Court judge.

The Notice states: "Orders of Certiorari to remove into this Honourable Court and quash the decisions of the Permanent Police Tribunal at Items 1, 3 and 5 and its Report dated June 11, 2008 and orders of Mandamus requiring the Tribunal to reconsider those matters in the light of the judgment of this Honourable Court."

Crown Counsel for the Attorney General, acting for Government, claims the Tribunal "erred in law" in granting these conditions and that they were outside the terms of reference of the arbitration. The Notice of Application says the Tribunal "reached decisions that were unreasonable and/or irrational and/or were decisions that no reasonable tribunal properly directing itself could reach".

However, the BPA say Government is reneging on the binding Arbitration Award in that if there was a dispute over the housing allowance being outside the terms of reference, the Tribunal ruled Government must give officers a seven per cent pay rise for each of the three years, October 2005-08, plus a $350 monthly housing subsidy for all officers not living in Police accommodation.

The Award states: "The implementation of the seven percent and housing subsidy would take place within two months of the date hereof should the parties find that it is not possible to implement the award with respect to housing."

Government however, has only offered the BPA a pay rise of: 4.5 percent for 2005-6, four percent 2006-7, and 4.25 percent 2007-8.

Lead BPA negotiator Inspector Darrin Simons last night said many Police officers were now "feeling disenfranchised".

"Officers are upset at the Government's offer," said Insp. Simons. "They think it is disingenuous and not in keeping with the spirit of arbitration.

"Why is Government continuing to make other offers in the face of a binding award. It is almost like attempting to negotiate all over again.

"I don't know whether a lot of officers are considering leaving the Force per se but there's a feeling that officers want to do something more robust to demonstrate their discontent.

"We are doing our best to manage this as public safety is paramount and is at the heart of what we do.

"But there is definitely a lot more frustration, and from my perspective, it's becoming more difficult to rationalise with officers as to why we should play by the rules when Government aren't?

"Government can spend $23 million on sports, $14 million on a golf course, $100,000 on a new car, trips in a private jet and yet they claim they cannot afford to pay Police the arbitrated Award."

The BPA is an association rather than a union and has around 425 members.

It is illegal for the Police to picket or strike, but on June 27 officers joined thousands of workers from the Bermuda Trade Union Congress in walking on the House of Assembly to demonstrate against Government's ongoing union disputes.

Last night a legal source said: "I don't think there has ever been an occasion when the Government has refused to acknowledge a binding Arbitration Award.

"It has to be of considerable concern to all trade unions, because clearly there is now no guarantee that arbitration following unsuccessful negotiations will lead to an ultimate result.

"The tone that has been set suggests that if Government doesn't like what the award looks like, they will simply seek to have the courts involved and start the process all over again.

"That is not in keeping with the spirit of the legislative framework and what legislators intended — that a binding Arbitration Award would bring about finality.

"It has set a precedent. Why would any trade union now go into negotiations with Government in good faith knowing that if the negotiations fail and they end up in an arbitration process, the Government may very well seek to have the results reviewed by a court because they don't like the result."

Senator Burch was unavailable for comment last night. However, on June 24, the Minister stated: "The Ministry is duty bound to challenge those aspects of the award that fall outside the terms of reference or are illegal (according to the Labour Relations Act 1975)."