Phyllis Thomas, News EditorThe storm of redundancies that tore through the country's industrial landscape this year, has so far up-rooted more than 4,000 workers from their jobs.
Almost every sector has been affected either by direct job losses or by the ripple effect.
Places like the bauxite companies, Cable and Wireless, Red Stripe, United Estates, the Coffee Board, Nestle and Grace Food Processors have all gone that route. The garment sector has almost been devastated by job losses and factory closures in the previous years.
Among the Main News last week was that the National Commercial Bank was set to make 840 workers redundant up to the year 2005. Discussions were continuing between the management and union at Jamalco which had already announced to the union last month that it was axing about 400 of its unionised staff, some of whom had been stupid enough to defy their union and gone on strike.
My position on the action of the workers is, if they feel that the union is not giving them the representation they need then they should fire the union. But ignoring the union's advice is really foolish since that undermines any stronghold there might have been in bargaining and it defeats the unity is strength principle.
But it was Seprod's announcement that it was making 200 workers redundant that floored workers and union alike. Pearnel Charles, BITU vice-president cannot believe that a company which made mega bucks in profits last year could send its workers into the streets among the unemployed.
Data supplied by the Ministry of Labour put the total number of workers to have lost their jobs since the start of the year at 4,062. This is minus those of Shell Company and the Airports Authority who were also made redundant. Also, The Gleaner had reported on other redundancies which were not on the Ministry's list, so the figure could well be over the 5,000 mark.
But what has been fuelling this wave of redundancies that can only fling prospects for national growth into a tail-spin, especially since those redundant workers are not finding employment elsewhere? Is it because of organisations who are wicked and don't give a damn about whether workers live or die? Is it because trade unions have, themselves, been made redundant with world events which influence how modern organisations operate, but which effectively cripple the unions? Or, maybe it is because of unions which have lost their spunk of yesteryear and so have failed to negotiate better deals that would have kept thousands more employed? Is it the fault of the workers who have remained stagnant in their own development and did not move with the time and further equip themselves to meet new challenges that come with change?
You know, the irony of the situation is that the path to growth has been destructive.
The companies found that they had no more use for the workers either because they implemented billion-dollar "plant modernisation" as in the case of Red Stripe; or "reorganised" as in the case of Grace Food Processors, an exercise that was supposed to have saved the company $70 million a year. Cable and Wireless' ongoing "rationalisation" programme aimed at improving "efficiency and profitability"; the "divestment" of massive citrus holdings at United Estates which sent home 1,200, are also reasons given for taking the redundancy route.
And as the President of the Jamaica Employers' Federation, Herbert Lewis, was quoted as saying in August, the "unprecedented levels of redundancies" - 11,861 between 1998 and August this year are a direct result of "market liberalisation and the introduction of new technology". The companies have no choice but to be part of the globalised market-place or face their own demise.
But the broader and more frightening picture is that, of the 11,861 persons to have been made redundant in the last three years, about a half of that number were sent home this year alone.
What I see down the road is more poverty and chaos in Jamaica as people struggle to survive and take up whatever options may present themselves - legal or illegal. It is a fierce competition for survival, with limited accommodation.
Right now it makes no sense telling workers about globalisation. What do some of them know, or indeed care about globalisation when they have children to feed? Global WHAT? And these nice, big words like rationalisation, liberalisation, modernisation, re-organisation, restructuring and out-sourcing may only confuse their brains and produce jaw-ache anyway.
Mr. Charles said Thursday, "This is a very sad year for the working class at all levels. Very little new jobs are created and much of the old has been lost." This has been the most unfriendly period for workers, he said.
I am no pessimist. So when I say I see poverty and chaos down the road, in the back of my mind is the fact that unemployment, poverty and crime are inextricably intertwined. Unless we can come up with that balance (even as we take the inevitable path of globalisation), that will equip us to participate in those external markets and at the same time enhance how we manage our human resources and keep people employed, we should prepare ourselves for long haul of national instability.
