Caswell Franklyn, Unity Workers Union
In 1939 Parliament, by way of the Trade Disputes (Arbitration and Enquiry) Act, put a mechanism in place to deal with trade disputes. The act defines a trade dispute as, “any dispute or difference between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms of the employment, or with the conditions of labour, of any person”.
It provides that any party to a dispute could report the matter to the Governor-General, who is empowered to appoint one or more arbitrators to hear and determine the matter, provided that both parties agree. The decision of the arbitrator would then be binding on both parties. Unfortunately for Barbados, trade unions have refused to utilise this method of dispute resolution for a number of reasons, but mainly because it would have deprived them of the opportunity to demonstrate their power to instil fear in the hearts of employers. That legislation remains in force and unused to this day.
Rather than use the law to promote dispute resolution, The Barbados Workers’ Union devised an alternative method, where disputes would be referred to the Chief Labour Officer for conciliation. If there is no resolution at that level, the matter would then be referred to the Minister of Labour, and ultimately to the Prime Minister, where no settlement is reached by the Labour Minster. Bear in mind that this system is voluntaristic and not binding on either party, but it really made successive Ministers of Labour feel as though they were being useful.
Mind you, from my experience, the union would only refer the matter to the Prime Minister when it found itself in an untenable position and needed to climb down and save face in the process. Of course, the climb-down would be accompanied by the the usual refrain – we settled out of respect for the office of Prime Minister.
With the coming into force of the Employment Rights Act, a new regime has replaced the voluntaristic approach for dealing with unfair dismissals. It has preserved a role for the Chief Labour Officer, as a conciliator only, but has made no provisions for the intervention of either the Minister of Labour or the Prime Minister.
Unfortunately, this nonsense of appealing to the Chief Labour Officer, in accordance with collective agreements still persist. Apparently, this is a case of old habits dying hard. Thankfully, a panel of the Employment Rights Tribunal, consisting of Kathy-A. Hamblin, Frederick Forde and Edward Bushell, has now put this misconception to rest, by what will only be a seminal ruling in the case involving Nicole Layne and G4S Security Solutions (Barbados) Limited.
In the first ground of appeal, the union alleged that the company “deliberately delayed processing [her] appeal as a consequence of which she was denied due process”. In dismissing that ground the tribunal observed:
“Later in his closing statement, Sir Roy also noted that the “Collective Agreement calls on us to meet without delay and resolve any differences.” If he was there suggesting that the disciplinary process should have proceeded from the outset in accordance with the terms of the Collective Agreement, rather than in accordance with the provisions of the Act, then he would have misconstrued the hierarchical position of the legislation in relation to that Agreement. Neither custom nor a private contractual arrangement takes precedence over the Act. The appeals process is the same whether an employee is unionised or not”.
The tribunal found in favour of the company but was constrained to note:
“This Claimant relied to her detriment on her Trade Union, which laboured under the misconception that an appeal lies as of right to the Chief Labour Officer in accordance with the terms of the parties’ Collective Agreement. The Union also based its “right” to appeal to the Chief Labour Officer on the Claimant’s behalf on custom or practice, disregarding the Act altogether”.
I can sympathise with some workers if they are not familiar with the provisions of the Employment Rights Act but I extend no such sympathy to persons who hold themselves out as workers’ or employers’ representatives.
Reblogged this on Caswell Franklyn’s Weblog.
Caswell
You would just have used a different approach to defend her, but from the time that woman realised that she was overheard using abusive language on the people’s radio, she should have been apologising profusely and begging for a second chance – or, failing that approach, gone long home quietly cussing HERSELF for doing shiite.
The whole trade union thing has gone awry…… while serfdom continues to accelerate its hold on the poor morons who continue to see themselves as ‘workers’.
Trade unions should have been about ENFRANCHISEMENT for committed, productive employees since the 1970’s….. not protecting the incompetence and laziness of hopeless and unproductive morons.
No wonder the whole society is shit.
A law from 1939 – 2018 = 79 years….steuppsss
Well Well
I don’t understand your comment.
The law from 1939 provided for binding arbitration and the BWU refused to use it, preferring instead to use might to settle disputes. Might made them right, even when they were wrong. This case shows that they are ill-equipped to function in the current environment.
Bushie
If I represented her, my advice would have been to apologise profusely. Failing that, I would have pleaded that a single outburst of regrettable language was not sufficient to justify dismissal and that the employer should use the steps in the Fourth Schedule Part A of the Employment Rights Act which requires an employer to use progressive discipline.
This lady lost her job because of the incompetence of her representative. The employer bent over backwards to assist her but her union did the wrong thing. Imagine, the employer gave her five days to appeal her dismissal but no appeal to the appropriate person was forthcoming. Five months later, the employer was still willing to hear the appeal but Sir Roy went on a frolic of his own instead of following the law.
She can now seek compensation from the BWU for incompetent representation.
@Caswell
Interesting case, hopefully Jeff will have some time to weigh in with a scholarly perspective. Imagine if we have such blatant deviation from what is law at a basic level what possibly transpires elsewhere.
Caswell….They found ways to circumvent or just totally ignore the archaic law.
The laws need to be upgraded and madeceven more binding…so that backward BWU et al cannot make up their own crap as they go along.
More checks and balances..
Well Well
It has nothing to do with the archaic law. Even when the law was new BWU refused to use it. That law was only used twice.
Sent from my iPad
Bushie
We generally agree with you though less interested in decrying the ‘uninterested’.
Within your schema maybe the BBE would have shown the stragglers the light
Which strengthens my argument for more checks and balances, everyone just does as they like on the island without oversight, regulatory bodies or authorities to follow or enforce regulations, rules and laws……tired of the word corruption. ..we have been overusing it.
Eg….a foreign offshore company opend a bogus bank on the island with the help of government the agencues responsible, and everyone else involved, curcumventing and ignoring the countries laws and nit a whimper was heard from the regulatory body or bodies, dont know if it’s FSC or whomever….and you only know because it was exposed in the Canadian parliament…..that is how everyone found out.
…so yes, the laws need to be upgraded to include punishment and jail time for those who willfully and maliciously refuse to adhere to them…..but that must include checks and balances…someone has to start guarding the guards.
Or Caswelll..you will continue going around in circles and as an 80 year old man….still complaining about the same practices, why, because the 1939 archaic laws will still be there and no one will be using them .
@ WW&C etc
Surely you jest.
You cannot possibly be saying that the Canadian parliament exposed a sham bank established in Barbados for the fraud that it was …and yet, not a word has been heard in Barbados about how this could have happened; who would have been responsible; what laws would have been breeched; what systems are in place to prevent a recurrence; and how many other such scam banks may have also slipped through….
…and who the RH going get locked up…
Shiite !!!
Only a pack of brass bowl wild boys could POSSIBLY preside over such a so-called country.
Is it possible for this place to sink any lower…?
No wonder the Americans do their own water tests….
Bushie
We had a friend who played the organ at an Anglican church somewhere in St. Philip.
And they used to have him play all kinds of dreary music every Sunday
And he got tired of it
One Sunday, he had more than a couple ………….. of a certain ‘spirit’
And went into the church and jazz up the people place
Of course he was fired
You sometimes remind us of him. LOL
Good analogy Pacha, but a very different ‘spirit’ is behind it…
LOL
ha ha ha
On second thoughts however, Bushie just talking a lotta shiite bout that bank..!!
Wuh if a man could run a CLICO Ponzi scheme bout here OPENLY, and in the process, rob THOUSANDS of people including the RH prime minister…
…and if YEARS later, this man still walking (indeed driving bout in big rides) free as a bird,
while his associates launder the stolen money in all kinda shiite schemes – at least one of which cost us less
…WHILE a ‘stink liar’ robs us again vis taxes to settle this stolen loot perhaps in the hope of getting another second hand big ride…
AND NOT A FELLA IS EVEN CHARGED – far less investigated ????????!!!!!
This has to be a SHIITE PLACE.
…this is why BBE has allow the shiite to flow on the main streets…
Stand directly below Government HQ …and tell Bushie what you smell…. yuk!!!
We now have one colossal shiite place – thanks to our nasty attitudes and greed…..and a set of demonic leaders.
http://www.cbc.ca/1.4490564
See for yourself..
Bushman…I shit you not, that is why I am telling Caswell that whole archaic system and it’s easily circumvented laws need an overhaul….with serious jail time a requirement for ignoring laws put in place to guarantee a functioning society……
……as is stands, the island lacks function….nothing else will suffice….and I concur, that is only one company that we know of setting up a fraudulent bank, enabled by government, so pray tell, what bogus criminal activities have the other companies been allowed to do by government, with no one in place to guard the guards.
“Loblaws in $400M tax fight with CRA over claims it set up bogus offshore bank
Barbados transactions were designed to ‘circumvent’ the Income Tax Act, government alleges
Photo of Zach Dubinsky
Zach Dubinsky · Senior Writer, CBC Investigations Unit · CBC News
January 17, 2018
FrontPageLoblawsCard
Loblaws is under scrutiny on a number of fronts, including its recent admission of price-fixing, revelations from the Paradise Papers and, now, a potential $400-million tax bill.
6.8k shares 636 comments
A senior judge warned Loblaws and the federal government this morning that she would not look kindly on any further procedural delays in a $400-million battle the two sides are waging in Tax Court.
Loblaws and the government were in a Toronto courtroom in one of the biggest offshore corporate tax-avoidance cases in the country, with authorities alleging the grocery conglomerate set up a bogus foreign bank to avoid tax on hundreds of millions of dollars in investment income.
The case has been brewing since 2015 and is slated for a full trial in April — more than a year after the originally scheduled start date, due to a series of procedural squabbles.
“I do not want to have to adjourn this again,” Associate Chief Justice Lucie Lamarre cautioned both sides on Wednesday.
The name of Loblaws subsidiary Glenhuron Bank Ltd. is seen in 2010 listed on the directory at the CGI Tower in Barbados. The CRA alleges the company’s actual activities ‘did not constitute banking.’ (CaribDigita/Wikimedia Commons)”
“
So…I hope Caswell recognizes that as long as the system is denied function by indifferent governments, he will continue to fight a losing battle.
That level of fraud was government sanctioned, no one can set up any bank just so….not anywhere.
So when BWU decides to create their own rules and procedures outside of government legislated laws and ACTS from back in 1939……it did not happen just so.
@WW@CNPAYS
At least two other Canadian companies in the same building.
Please alert our London Financial eagle of a possible story
Theo….that fraud will fizzle, dont care how much information he gets, how big the story, he cant follow through…
…..ya will have to call in real journalists from US and Canada….the Canadian journalists already made the trek, that is why we are getting the story.
@ Caswell
Intellectually stimulating and well written.
I think that those of us who aspire to lead and advise need to be masters of our field. This involves constant review of our subject area for conflicts with other approaches.
I particularly like your reference for the necessity to update in keeping with the changing environment. The social,economic and political environments change faster than the speed of thought these days. But it calls for the level of commitment which you display to keep abreast of these.
Thanks Bernard. I appreciate your assessment of my effort. I am restricted to 650 words and wished that I could have developed it more. I might have to do a part two.
Sent from my iPad
She can now seek compensation from the BWU for incompetent representation.
@Caswell, Agreed. Unfortunately we do not have the equivalent of the Canadian or US provision for the duty of fair representation by a union, but a suit in negligence may be possible, She would have to prove though that had the union done the proper thing she would not have lost the case or would have kept her employment.
Notwithstanding the merits of the case I find t unbelievable that someone would be dismissed for uttering the word “fuck….” on a walkie talkie, it appears that the words were said in a moment of frustration under one’s breath a case of “open mike” and was not directed at the jet Blue employee and even if it was a simple reprimand would have sufficed not summary dismissal. However, this is Barbados and if one calls a member of the local constabulary policeman an “idiot” they can be hauled before the courts and charged with an offence.
There is a contradictory element to life in Barbados prurient in public appearances and vulgar behind the curtain but some of us are not fooled. For what its worth here is a case in which the employee prevailed although her language and conduct was far more egregious but in the opinion of the Court :
“The Court asserted that even though Ms. Ramsay’s actions constituted disgraceful behaviour, such “threats” and obscenities were commonplace in the workforce due to contemporary cultural and social attitudes and customs in Barbados”
Ms Layne should take her appeal to Court
http://www.barbadosemployers.com/News/Abusive-Threatening-Language.aspx
Ms Layne should take her appeal to Court
This might be wasteful, Sarge, even though your point on the apparent harshness of the dismissal is well taken. I seriously doubt whether she would be able to establish that no reasonable employer would have dismissed the employee in the circumstances.
G4S had two options. 1. Fairly dismiss Ms Layne as per the Employment Rights Act 2012 – if it could not change JetBlue’s decision not to work with her. It would have been difficult for G4S to change JetBlue’s decision because Ms Layne did not apologise to JetBlue. 2. Find a suitable alternative job for Ms Layne where she would no longer have any contact with JetBlue.
“At least two other Canadian companies in the same building.”
And both were also named in Paradise Papers, we wondered back then why 3 or 4 companies had that CGI Tower address…lol
…we are now left to wonder what legislative Acts or Laws the government allowed them to break as they allowed Loblaws, what other bogus banks or bogus companies they were allowed to register. …while everyone ignored the laws for a few hand to mouth dollars.
WW&C
this fits your agenda well? hence you do not care the inaccuracies you pen?
It was NOT exposed in the Canadian parliament, though it may have been discussed. It is an ongoing case, launched in 2015, and has been in-out of the business media since then.
Nobody has proved it is a “bogus bank”, it is one of several claims by the CRA.
The major claim is the improper recognition of income and hence tax payable. How can the Barbadian authorities be responsible for a Canadian company (the claim is against Loblaw not Glenhuron) tax filings in Canada??
The mere fact, the CRA is claiming over $400M in unpaid taxes, suggests Glenhuron produced revenue and profits, the basis of taxation. Hence, it was doing something? And it was in the financial management arena.
@NO
Didn’t you address this matter last week under another blog?
the matter then was ‘offshore’ in a basket. This pertain to a specific legal matter CRA vs Loblaw
“It was NOT exposed in the Canadian parliament, though it may have been discussed.”
Exposed….discussed in Canadian parliament….what’s the difference Northern?
….it’s been 3 years, you have a problem with the Bajan public knowing about this?….with it being exposed so Caribbean people can see what white criminals are up to….how they still rob Caribbean islands?
So what is your agenda?
Why should Canadians and everyone else worldwide know….and not Bajans?
I repeat…I am not here to keep the secrets of criminals…just so you know.
I posted this same link to that same blog and it is still there.
In case you dont know ….Glenhuron, Amophora and a few others were named in Paradise Papers, read about Loblaws acknowledging certain things again, you seem to be the only one on here trying to protect this lot.
If there was no evidence…that case would have been thrown out a year ago…but it is going to trial.
I don’t really care if what I am doing bothers you….really,
Not one media outlet on the island is covering this, the people dont know they are being duped by an incommpetent and colluding government and you are fine with that…but I am not.
Ya should ask barbadostoday why they are not covering the story about Loblaws and their shadow company Glenhuron…..they are covering everything else.
Seems like yall got a lot to hide….CGI Towers got sold quick time so in 2016 when the heat came on…in 2015.
Ya had a problem with bajans knowing that Morneau Shepell having an offshore company in Barbados and getting paid taxpayers money for doing actuary work for government despite the existence of local actuaries…..and not only in Barbados, they are doing that crap..
,……now ya got a problem with the people finding out about shadow companies which are not only ripping off the Canadian tax agency, but also the island, cause if you think they are n6it finding a way to pay nit6hing in taxes, you are the only one.
You should change your tactics to islanders being able to utilize the double taxation treaty with Canada in reverse……..ya bias is showing.
Well Well
I was informed that CGI Towers was sold and you also keep making the same assertion. However, I spoke to Peter Harris who was prepared to provide evidence that the building was still owned by his company and had not been in fact sold. I took him to his word, so if you have evidence to the contrary please let us have it.
Sent from my iPad
@Caswell
When the charge was first bandied about you were told that a very reliable BU source had advised that the building was not sold. Our position stands,
Northern….ya got a reàl problem, the Westons could never impress me enough to get me to genuflect before them, that is your job.
We see the BLP keeping some noise tonight
I would like to get back to the comments on my column. This case is a classic example of the poor service offered by trade unions in this country. For too long they have relied on sabre rattling to resolve disputes and have failed to develop the necessary skills to adequately represent their members. There is no amount of explanation that can excuse the incompetence that forced the Employment Rights Tribunal to comment as follows:
“This matter underscores the need for employees and employers and their respective representatives to familiarise themselves with their rights and obligations under the Act. On the one hand, the Respondent demonstrated that it followed to the letter the requirements of the Act in respect of the conduct of disciplinary proceedings. On the other hand, the Claimant and her representatives displayed a troubling lack of appreciation of the scope and intent of the Act, which had been in effect for more than one year at the date of the Claimant’s dismissal.”
This poor lady was misrepresented by Sir Roy Trotman and, his attorney-at-law, daughter. The only decent thing that BWU can do is offer compensation for its negligent and incompetent showing.
Caswell Franklyn January 28, 2018 at 9:08 PM #
Are land registry records available to the public?
Caswell….did Harris show you he is still in posession of the deeds?.
That would certainly be proof the business is NOT sold…posted to ALL media.
The building is sold, ask his good friend Rommel Marshall or his brother….who are closer to him than you will ever be.
I have never known Harris to tell the truth, never thought you would fall into his trap..
…..the only evidence I will post everywhere in time is proof beyond a doubt that he refuses to pay injured people on the island, that he uses the supreme court to destroy lives……that one you can check yourself in the supreme court system, if you care to.
Well Well
You are absolutely correct, a source did tell me that the the CGI Towers was sold. However, as I said earlier I spoke with Peter Harris and he has assured me that it is not so. I have no reason to doubt him. Maybe, your experience with him is different from mine, I have read your constant attacks on him.
The Peter Harris that I know goes back to the very pleasant little boy from school. It is hard for me to imagine him as the monster that you project when I don’t have or have any personal knowledge of the things you say about him.
If I thought that the things you say about him were true our car would not be insured by CGI. Last August our car was rear-ended while I was sitting at the traffic lights. There was no dispute as to who was at fault. While I was still running around seeking medical attention and before I contacted CGI someone called me and delivered a hired car to my home. Within two weeks of the accident, we had a cheque for the car that was written off.
I am yet to make a quantified claim for my injuries. Any delay is mine. So you see I cannot see him as you do. So far all my interactions with him from the time he was eleven plus were pleasant.
Sent from my iPad
“Caswell
When the charge was first bandied about you were told that a very reliable BU source had advised that the building was not sold..”
Actually, it was Caswell who said his source told him that CGI Towers WAS SOLD…..that memory of mine selldom fails, it does but seldomly.
….but that is neither here nor there, it is secondary to the real issues at hand since the authorities FSC etc never thought it necessary to investigate why an insurance company would sell an asset it acquired with policyholder’s money….or why it has been keot secret.
….so.there you have it again…no functioning regulatory body to investigate, regulate and keep these well known and downright criminal and shady companies in line..
,,,.,.no guards to guard the guards or uphold the island’s laws to benefit the citizens like Caswell’s fired employee who got screwed by BWU and their blatant disregard for employment laws or rights, it always comes full circle.
But what bothers me most of all, even more than Harris not coming out nearly 2 years ago to refute and deny the building was sold to Scotia Bank….is that FSC did not come out in the interest of policyholders to publicly put their minds to rest, saying that they investigated both Harris, the Baileys and Scotia as it related to any sale of CGI Towers and found there was no sale or that there was a sale and WHY..
,……FSC did not even have the common courtesy to put the accusations, which have also been made by Harris’ closest friends…to rest, it’s like all of them are detached from reality and what concerns or negatively impacts citizens….maybe now they will see their own incompetence as IMF reported and errors in their inefficient practices…and say something.
For those who are slow and dont understand the dynamics at play, that information came directly from Harris…..that is a trap of his own making, that will snap shut on him in the fullness of time.
Caswell
How is your personal business arrangements with a longtime school friend of any relevance here? Why are you not insured with Cooperators General? Is it because you opposed that business from the very start – just as you oppose Credit Unions having a bank?
Since you are so close to Harris, why not investigate his investments in the medical field and let us know if you are happy with what you see.
You wanted to get back to your case against the BWU? …OK.
Again you are being personal and petty here. Sir Roy tried his usual stunt and it just did not work this time with the tribunal. You would have failed equally miserably with your approach.
The POINT is that the woman did shiite.
Employees MUST learn that there are consequences for their actions and performance. This shiite about giving the benefit of doubt to workers – while productivity plummets, is bare “balarney”.
What you SHOULD be pushing as a union leader is for opportunities for workers to acquire shares in any business in which they work; for them to be as productive as possible; and to then leverage that share ownership to become owners and employers in their own right.
Even when Sir Roy tried that with UCAL, it turned out to be a flop. When you had the opportunity to support Cooperators General you sought to destroy it….and even now, you choose to support a questionable character of “transport-board-insurance-scam-fame”, instead of a credit union owned insurance business.
All of wunna trade union leaders are jokers…. and the whole concept as practised – is shiite.
No wonder we are in the mess that we are in….
@Bush Tea
We should not muddy the issue here, there is no verifiable evidence that the CGI building was sold. All Caswell is saying is that he has had a good experience with the company and Harris. BU is willing to confirm to the BU community based on any document received the status once and for all. We are prepared to promise not to publish the document. What we can confirm is that Scotiabank has expanded its presence in the building. Until there is concrete evidence to the contrary the building was not sold is our position.
Caswell…I admire your reminiscing, how very loyal of you..
But the hundreds of lives Harris has destroyed in Barbados…using YOUR Supreme Court….will beg to differ.
You need to pay more attention to the personal injury claims regarding Transport Board and not those couple thousand dollar fender benders involving CGI..
I know people who had minor damage to their cars and were quickly taken care of by CGI…the operative word here being MINOR..but when it came to claims that went outside a couple thousand dollars, when it meant replacing a whole vehicle…it was a whole nother animal…
So you see, we both have stories to share…
Ya might want to ask Harris why that 1.3 million dollar personal injury claim has still not been settled after 9 years, why he is hiding and having his lawyers claim they cannot find him, why he is not issuing checks to claimants, why he is using his mediocre lawyers to use dirty tricks to prevent cases from closing….and that is one of many….why has he clogged up the supreme court with personal injury cases…for 15 years…and that one you can investigate for yourself at the supreme court…if you care to..
I have no reason to lie on Harris, but as long as the evidence is available to me…he will be exposed, ah dont have a gram of sentimentality,
I will say it again, so when that trap snaps shut, no one will say they were not aware as Bajan people love to do, the information that CGI Towers was sold to Scotia Bank….came DIRECTLY from Peter Harris.
I have my own opinions on WHY the information was allowed to circulate among the population for nearly 2 YEARS, was never refuted by him until…you…asked him and was never made public, but that too I will keep until the fullness of time.
And I did not even get to the part about fake medicine coming out of Harris’ fly by night pharmacies…
….I will let Bushman deal with that because personal injury files are tangible and accessible….and I got access.
….that old school tie crap will kill many Bajans….the Cawmere and Harsun clique got the island in a shithole of real proportions….then the products of the newer seconadry schools got control of the government and finished it off.
Bushie
Yuh right again
But ‘pettiness’ is central to the Bajan character.
It is impossible to properly define Barbadian culture and not deal with pettiness at the centre
Pettiness in politics, economics, social, technological, environmental, legal.
How many times have you seen purportedly highly credentialed Bajan idiots come here and could detect a spelling error instead of the substantive argument?
How many times have we seen Black Bajan people cutting eat other’s throats for pittances while Whites or honourable Whites can get a ‘popularly’ elected government to go to their parliament and transfer ownership of the treasury.
How many times have we seen the Black educated elites come here and support interests not of their own, and do so routinely?
You have previously commended Caswell as a man who will expose his best friend for the slightest infraction against the people, what happened?
Pacha, Bushie and Well Well
If I had any proof of the claims made against Peter Harris, I would be the first one to expose him. However, you are asking me to condemn him and the only thing that I have to go by is the gospel according to Bushie, Pachamama and Bushie. All of whom I suppose are the names stated on your birth certificates. All I know about any of you is that Bushie is a fellow that I inflicted a few blow on when I was at school.
If you supply me with the proof and that will be another matter. Until such time I will consider him an honourable man.
Bushie
You asked why the car is not insured by Co-operators which is a reasonable query when you consider that it was me who proposed from the floor of a League meeting that the credit unions should form an insurance company.
The answer is simple. We had two cars one insured by Co-operators (mine) and the wife’s that was insured by CGI. One day a man drove through a major stop and wrote off my car. He had no insurance, no driving licence and the road tax was not paid. Co-operators did not pursue him on my behalf. Instead, a representative told me that I was on my own. When that company came into being my car was insured through my broker with Clico. I switched only to be ignored when I needed the insurance company to assist me. Now ask me again why our car is insured by CGI.
Sent from my iPad
I think what is escaping Caswell….my concern is NOT whether the building has been SOLD or NOT…although it fits nicely into dishonest histories…either way, it will prove what I have said all along…which means even if it was NOT sold…Harris had a reason to put the information out their….millions in reasons.
My concern has always been about injured people…particularly those with GENUINE claims against Transport Board …would not want to be robbing insurance companies cause then ya become just like them.
…..the proof that EXISTS that CGI refuses to honor their commitment to pay out claims…,LARGE CLAIMS..
…the proof that EXISTS that the supreme court is maliciously CLOGGED, with CGIs personally injury cases and have been for years……all of which can be found in the supreme court…if anyone cared enough to check or investigate.
The fact that I have my hands on proof about what CGI does to injured people who are disabled and have a lifetime of pain..
……it is not simply about an employee losing his or her job, as is Caswell’s concerns in the society…….it is about disabled people who are so severely injured that they can never work again and CGI/Harris maliciously refusing to finish the cases or settle the cases so those people can get acccess to adequate treatment and a means to survive…it is about his callousness and greed when it comes to Bajans and paying out large sums of money to the injured.
In saying all of that….bring on the proof already re CGI Towers…lol…dont deprive me.
If Harris honors his commitments to the injured people I know tommorrow …eg……PAY THEM THEIR MONEY….or whenever the legal process demands it…he will have no need to see me mention his name on any blog ever again….am a gal of my word.
……of course that might be tough for him, since Harris does not know which personal injury file or files I have acccess to…now there is a conundrum…lol
Caswelll….fine.
Just give me some time, time is very important here…why do you think the supreme court is clogged up with CGIs many unresolved personal injury cases?
No mud involved David….
Bushie don’t even care if the building has been sold or not. Bushie’s association with CGI is the same as was had with CLICO.
Bushie likes Caswell.
The substantive point is that Caswell should be bigger than picking on Sir Roy’s ineptness. None of the unions seem able to think outside of the box of ‘begging for a little pick’ for unproductive brass bowls….and looking for annual raises.
As to CGI.
How the hell can a long time credit union champion choose CGI over Cooperators?
Surely Caswell jests……
@ Pacha
Given the source of Bushie’s opinions, what you may need to reflect on, are the instances when YOU THINK that the bushman is in error….. mainly with respect to BBE and your misconception of some ‘white god’.
There may well be an alternative explanation……
LOL
Pacha…unless Harris/CGI settles and/or pays out to those whom I KNOW have genuine personal injury claims against CGI Insurance…I will hold Caswell to his word, on that you can count.
@ Caswell
Do you think that Bushie is of recent vintage?
First the bushman is much too old (and feared) for you to have slapped at school…
Also, (and more to the point) you SURELY are not asking us to believe that a man who moves the courts of Barbados to please little clerks and security guards- could have been unfaired by a functionary at an insurance company which is OWNED by your credit union …. and all you did was to run away to a questionable alternative – one that offers predatory rates much like CLICO did with their interest rates…. but where the owner is a personal friend and school buddy of yours.
That would have to be another Caswell, ….not the fearless crusader from St Thomas.
Bushie
What kind of dodge is that, man!
Talk plain. We have no way of interpreting your biblical doublespeak.
We however deal with all kinds of people who get their opinions from a number of similarly doubtful sources which are no less valid/or invalid than yours maybe.
Or is this the typology which assumes a certain backwardness on our part or forthright failure to similarly embrace presumed or enlightened ideas thus held.
If our suspicions are true. Then, the holder of such BBE ideas indeed represent prime causation of the very problems we waste time seeking to confront – classism, racism, militarism, the caste system etc.
@ Pacha
You tend to over-intellectualise things when a VERY SIMPLE approach is obvious and indisputable.
In the final analysis, you simple have to judge by the FRUIT produced.
Can a dunks tree produce bananas?
Can you pick peas from a potato patch?
So if you see a tree producing mangoes every damn day, why get into a big discussion on its biological origin? Why fight about the botanical name? …or even who planted it?
Just call it a mango tree….. and frig the imposters who keep calling themselves ‘mango’ trees and bearing limes and lemons every single day.