Taxing the workers more

Those who are opposing the current redundancy legislation argue, as Mrs Ethlyn Norton-Coke did, that the current redundancy payment "is a deterrent to employment". Sadly, as is so typical in Jamaica, no data are put forward in support of such contention. Nor were any data advanced on the job creation magic of this "employee-contributed unemployment scheme".

What, however, is undeniable is that this sweet-sounding scheme will make the workers of Jamaica, rather than the employers, pay the cost of any future redundancies. It is the same type of thinking which seeks to further shift the taxpaying burden to the lower classes of society, while easing the tax burden on the higher income-earning segment of society. It is the same type of thinking now being advocated by the Republicans in the United States.

It is not new thinking. It is only now being dressed in the subterfuge of an insurance scheme to liberate employers from sharing the wealth with the employees at the end of employees' service. It is the same thinking which opposed company-contributed pension and health insurance schemes. It is the same argument that opposed maternity leave with pay for women, as well as equal pay for women and men doing the same work. It is the same thinking that says there should be no compulsory recognition of trade unions or collective bargaining for wages and fringe benefits for workers.

This thinking is not about the cost of doing business, but is about how companies can make the most profit while paying the least to their employees. This is not just a Jamaican thinking. It is a debate taking place all over the world. It is about power and who should control it. It is about ideology, not cost.

Unjust law

Prior to 1974, when redundancy payment became law, Jamaican workers were abused and exploited much more than they are today. Up to that time, the applicable law was the Masters and Servants Act. That was a law passed in 1842, just four years after the ending of slavery. Who were the lawmakers back then? Did they not represent the slave-owned class in the main? The same slaveowners who got their 'redundancy payment' from the British government for the loss of the free labour they got from the slaves. Under that law, no matter how long and faithful one worked with a master/employer, the servants/workers were only entitled to two weeks' notice or payment instead of the notice. That unjust law remained on our books for 132 years, through colonialism and even beyond our first decade of Independence.

Many companies, local and foreign, have invested in Jamaica since the enactment of the redundancy payment law 37 years ago. They have created hundreds of thousands of jobs in our economy. They have innovated, restructured and have paid redundancy when due. The redundancy-payment system has worked. It is not broke. There is no need to change it. It may be complemented by an employer-contributed system of insurance if you want, but don't tax the poorly paid workers any more.

The redundancy arrangement has allowed for workers after years of employment, having contributed to the wealth accumulation of the company, to be compensated in certain circumstances when leaving the company before retirement. It is an important social-security measure. It has helped to keep the lid on social upheavals in our society. It has given many a worker a chance 'to step up inna life'. It has prevented many workers whose jobs have been made redundant from becoming hungry. We all know that a hungry man is often an angry man. Instead of that anger being let loose on the land, it has been channelled into constructive and wealth-creating opportunities. This has included creation of new jobs in many cases. It has been good for Jamaica.

Noisy minority

Jamaica is not the only country in the world with a redundancy-payment system. The International Labour Organisation, consisting of almost 200 government countries, in addition to employers and trade unions from these countries, is in support of appropriate termination benefits. Most have opted for a redundancy/severance-payment approach. In those countries, there are also opponents of redundancy payment, but like here, they remain a noisy minority in the quest to restore some of the power lost by the employer class as a result of progressive and enlightened labour legislation worldwide.

The redundancy-payment system has worked, for the most part, in coping with the impact of the recent recession. Information available reveals that approximately 100,000 became unemployed during the crisis. How would the "employee-contributed scheme" have coped with that? Would there have been enough in the fund to pay unemployment insurance? Or would the Budget-cutting Government be called upon to make the payment? Would they have to impose new taxes to make the unemployment payment, or would they have had to cut the Budget further to make the payment?

It is the obvious answers to these questions why with "vehemence" and "rash dismissal" I described the unemployment insurance proposal as foolish. From that position I will not back away. There must be no more taxation of the workers. Leave the redundancy laws as they are.

It is certainly very pleasing when a newspaper columnist finds his ideas being repeated with approval by the editorial. It is even more complimentary when such a revered column cannot successfully be used to show any inconsistency with present thought even though it was written over two years ago. Indeed, as the writer of that February 8, 2009, column, I am most knowledgeable that it was written fully conscious of, and dependent on, the current redundancy arrangement. I encourage readers to examine that column titled 'Surviving the redundancy fever', as the Wednesday's editorial appreciated, it is very relevant to present times.

Sadly, however, the editorial writer, in a rush to condemn the "gaggle of trade union bosses" in general, and me in particular, misused the power of my excellent column by applying quotations entirely out of context. Let the readers be the judge.

Lambert Brown is president of the University and Allied Workers' Union. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and Labpoyh@yahoo.com.