Minister: labour law is silent on disaster responsibilities
Life may be returning to normal for most Belizeans following the close call with Hurricane Felix, but some confusion and even bitterness remains in the often fragile relationship between labour and management. The question involves rights and obligations in the time before and after a natural disaster. News Five’s Marion Ali spoke to Labour Minister Francis Fonseca and discovered that the law provides little guidance.
Francis Fonseca, Labour Minister
“As it now stands Marion, the only provision under the law that deals with an act of God which results in the frustration of employment is section 32 of the Labour Act. Under that section of the law where employment is frustrated as a result of an act of God, such as a hurricane that we have just experienced there is no obligation on employers to pay employees as a result of that act of God. The whole rationale for that of course is that in a time of disaster, in a natural disaster, employers and employees can suffer. We have the example in Corozal of the Fruta Bomba, for example, where the entire industry has fallen prey to disaster and they’re not able to function. So if there were a requirement that they should continue to pay their workers that would be simply impossible for them to meet that requirement. So the law tries to provide some balance, in the sense that it is not placing a burden on either the employer or the employee. Now we understand obviously that that has created some challenges for employees, and that is why the government has worked with the Social Security Board for example, to activate the unemployment benefits under the Social Security Act, that Scheme and that fund and I think that is working fairly well. That is a short-term remedy for people who have lost employment. As it relates to time off, the law is completely silent on that issue. And the point I should make overall is that I think this is a whole area of the law that we need to look at very carefully. In fact we have started a discussion with NEMO on this very issue some time ago, understanding that it is an area of the law that we need to perhaps revise, review, and come up with specific recommendations that we can then consult on with the private sector and with the labour unions so that we can come up with the proper remedy for these situations where there is great uncertainty.”
“Obviously the discretion that employers exercise is very important. We’ve heard complaints of some employers demanding that workers be at work or stay at work during the hurricane. Obviously that is completely unacceptable and there is a scope for that kind of matter to be brought to the attention of the Labour Department so that we can sit down with those employers and ensure that in the future that does not happen again, that in the future they do act reasonably when they are faced with this type of disaster. So I think we learned from these lessons. We’ve heard the complaints from the people, and so we need to put in place— we have to strengthen the law, make it more responsive to the needs of our people, especially our workers, and at the same time have a proper conversation with employers so that we can arrive at some consensus on a way forward with this issue.”
Fonseca says it should take at least two months to formulate more appropriate legislation governing labour issues in the face of a hurricane.
