LABOUR leaders who have been fighting to gain representational rights for more than 12,000 private security guards who the companies insist are private contractors, say they have been handed a major victory last Friday after a ruling by the Supreme Court gave ‘contract workers’ the legal right to have any union of their choice represent them.

The ruling came on Friday by Justice Marva MacIntosh, who was presiding over a case between the Holiday Inn Sunspree Resort – the claimants – and the National Workers Union (NWU), represented by attorney Candis Craig of Hamilton and Craig.

The dispute arose between the hotel’s management and the NWU, which wanted bargaining rights for those category of workers not considered permanent employees.

The dispute was referred to the Industrial Disputes Tribunal (IDT) for arbitration.

The matter subsequently went before the Supreme Court, which handed down its ruling on Friday morning – almost two years after the hotel’s management challenged a previous (and similar) ruling by the IDT.

In handing down her judgement in favour of the union, Justice MacIntosh said there was no error of law and the decision of the Tribunal is final and conclusive pursuant to Section 12 (4) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act.

The NWU maintains that the hotel’s employees are full-time personnel and are entitled to union representation but the hotel has argued that the majority are contract workers and are therefore not eligible for union representation.

Yesterday trade union leaders hailed the ruling, regarded as a new judicial precedent.

Former head of the NWU, Clive Dobson, who anchored the union’s bid, described the victory as a landmark one.

“This is a landmark victory for the entire labour movement in Jamaica because a legal precedent has now been set. It’s a case I am very proud of. It’s another landmark case like the Flour Mills saga a few years ago,” Dobson told the Observer yesterday.

Added Dobson: “My interpretation of the judgement is that the hotel will not be able to appeal it. And this case is applicable to all groups of workers like those at Holiday Sunspree.”

Echoing similar sentiments, Danny Roberts, vice president of the NWU, said he was very pleased with the court’s decision.

“Obviously, it has very positive implications because now a whole host of workers once described as contract workers will now be eligible for union membership,” Roberts said.

“It is now time for us to challenge more of those employers who ascribe titles to workers to deprive them of unionisation.”

Roberts also commended Dobson for leading the fight, and lauded him for his desire to make another impact on the practice of industrial relations and unionization in Jamaica.

The victory comes as labour unions in Jamaica intensify their efforts to gain representational rights for security workers. In December of last year, several labour unions resolved to intensify their efforts to gain representational rights for more than 12,000 private security guards who their companies insisted are private contractors.

There are some 15,000 people employed in the industrial security sector, of whom less than 10 per cent are unionised and although the companies insist that they are private contractors, they are supervised, assigned work shifts and paid on a fortnightly basis – conditions which, both the ministry and the trade unions insist, meet the definition of a “worker” under the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA).

Most of them work 12-hour days and above the 40-hour work week provided for in the National Minimum Wage Act without overtime pay. But although the definition was expanded recently the companies insist that they are not workers but contractors.

The current definition in the Act relates to “an individual who has entered into, or works, or normally works (where the employment has ceased) under a contract, however described in circumstances where that individual works under the direction, supervision and control of the employer regarding hours of work, management of discipline and such other conditions as are similar to those which apply to an employee.”