LABOUR Minister Karl Samuda is urging security guards who are disgruntled over their employment contracts to bring their cases directly to the ministry, as it has no concrete reports of employment rights being violated by security companies.

“What is happening currently is that there is talk broadly about the rights of security guards being violated. To date there are no concrete reports represented to the ministry, outlining the rights that have been violated,” Samuda said in a statement to the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Opposition spokesperson on labour Dr Angela Brown Burke, however, threw cold water on the “case-by-case basis” on which the ministry says it is addressing the complaints. She said one or several complaints from guards who work for the same company should trigger an investigation of the contracts for all guards employed to the entity, as one contract constitutes a template of how the company may be violating the rights of all guards on staff.

Samuda told the House that notwithstanding the complaints of the approximately 25,000 security guards employed in the country, 85 per cent have signed new contracts, which are at the centre of the grouse.

“If a security guard believes he or she has been denied any worker-related benefits, that guard can attend one of the offices of the Ministry of Labour and express themselves, and we will go in search of the solutions on their behalf. This occurs daily as a matter of course and commitment,” he said, pointing out that since the Supreme Court ruled, in Marksman Limited vs National Housing Trust in September 23, that third-party security guards employed to Marksman are employees and not independent contractors, security guards, since last month, have been seeking guidance from the ministry on whether they should sign new employment contracts.

He said so far, 88 guards islandwide have sought clarity from the ministry to understand the process more clearly. “The complaints relate primarily to their previous years of service. They are concerned about the time they have spent in the industry and they have felt that somewhere along the line they have entertained the hope that they could be rewarded for that service in a concrete way. They are also concerned about vacation leave,” he told the House, adding that all complaints lodged are being processed for amicable solutions, and that he would personally be meeting with guards and companies to hear their concerns.

Samuda said the main issues he has seen in contracts relate to a lack of specific transitional contract arrangements. He warned that all companies that provide security services must ensure that the guards have employment contracts in which they are guaranteed vacation leave, sick leave, overtime, and maternity leave, and meet all minimum standards for decent work.

“I emphatically state that any agreement that is in breach of these labour standards should be brought before this ministry for immediate intervention, and there will be absolutely no compromise on that,” the minister said.

Brown Burke, who has been calling for the urgent setting up of a joint industrial council for industrial security, welcomed the minister’s announcement of the appointment of a committee to establish the JIC, but argued that empathy is not good enough.

“It [this situation] is unique because we are talking about an industry that has never been unionised, an industry that is known for exploitation of workers, so it is not enough to simply say you want to make sure every security guard has an employment contract. As we all know, the devil is in the details,” she stated.

“I cannot, for the life of me, understand how you could have contracts that basically deny workers their rights, and that just becomes a case-by-case basis. Once you come and you see that Johnny has brought in front of you a contract that denies them rights to which they are entitled, you have a responsibility to go beyond talking about individual negotiation,” the opposition spokesperson added.

Brown Burke said all the contracts for security guards that have come to her attention ignore years of service. “They go so far as to say, ‘with the signing of this contract you have relinquished any right to any disputes and anything owed from before’. I don’t see how a Government could sit down and be comfortable with that. So, pardon me if we have thought that the issue was sufficiently grave that we should stand up and talk about it. We will continue to talk about it, and take other steps, until we see the situation rectified,” she told the House.

Samuda stressed that the Government has, in its history, and by its actions over the years with various pieces of worker-rights legislation, demonstrated its clear commitment to the worker.