|
How shameful for the government to take it against the Sea Malta employees for the way the whole privatisation issue was treated by their unions. These poor workmen did not only lose their job but they are now facing an uphill struggle to get paid their wages and redundancy payments.
This week I happened to be before the judge who was hearing the case that these Sea Malta employees are instituting against Sea Malta, so that the Sea Malta vessels MV Maltese Falcon and MV Zebbug will not be sold until their claims are met. Not only are the liquidators arguing against the rightful claims of the seafarers but they instituted a series of preliminary pleas with an attempt to make the life of these poor workmen as difficult as possible.
Now I am not blaming the lawyer of the liquidators of Sea Malta, who was also the lawyer of Sea Malta when it was still breathing. I blame the government, which is the majority shareholder of Sea Malta, who like a woman who has just been dumped by her man is resorting to foolish tactics which make their life miserable. What I learnt from the submissions is that the workers are claiming Lm1.01 million in wages, redundancy payments and liquidation damages. Article 64 of their collective agreement states that in the event that Sea Malta is liquidated, the workers are entitled to liquidation damages amounting to full redundancy payments.
However, the liquidators, who happen to be John Abela and Dr Chetcuti Ganado is also an employee of Bank of Valletta and whose employers is one of the privileged debtors, are claiming that the liquidation damages are not privileged. This means that the workers are guaranteed notice money and wages but the Bank of Valletta will come second in the ranking and if there is any money left, they will be paid the liquidation damages. You may ask but how does the Bank of Valletta come into play? Simple – when Sea Malta bought the two vessels, they were pledged with Bank of Valletta against a government guarantee for Sea Malta and with the bank. However, now the government has opted not to continue to give this guarantee to the detriment of the workers.
It was so sad to see these workers in court trying to get paid for the work they have done for Sea Malta, something which is lawfully due to them. It was even sad to see the liquidators of Sea Malta embark on delaying tactics such as preliminary pleas that thanks to Dr Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici’s urge to turn topsy-turvy the procedural law, are proving to be a cushy excuse for those who want to delay procedures.
A case in point is a plea which was discussed in the case of the Sea Malta employees: Dr Mifsud Bonnici boasted that proceedings are now made easier by deleting the word ‘citazzjoni’ and replacing it with ‘rikors’ but as usual these amendments are always half-baked. Since Dr Mifsud Bonnici omitted to issue a sweeping statement saying that wherever the word ‘citazzjoni’ is used in our laws, this is to be replaced by the word ‘rikors’, obviously Sea Malta liquidators are saying that Section 37 of the Merchant Shipping Act, on which the Sea Malta workers are basing their claim, says ‘citazzjoni’ and not ‘rikors’ and they are having a field day pleading nullity of the whole proceedings.
The proceedings also revealed that the intension of the liquidators is to sell these two Sea Malta vessels by public tender and they are contesting the case of the workers purely to be able to sell these two vessels as quickly as possible. But the problem of the workers is that, once these ships are sold and their proceeds become liquid cash, they have no guarantee they will continue to rank number one in the list of creditors. It was sensible on the part of the workers to ask for a guarantee from the liquidators that their claims will continue to be in the same ranking if they withdraw the proceedings for the ships not to be sold. However, the liquidators do not want to make this guarantee.
I cannot understand this country but if I am not mistaken, we also have a law regulating the working conditions of the workers, and if an employer in the private sector does not pay his workers redundancy money, the Director of Labour tells the Commissioner of Police to institute criminal proceedings against that employer. But it seems that there is one law for the private sector and one law for the government sector as no criminal proceedings were instituted against Sea Malta for failing to pay the workers.
As an aside, this is like the law governing lift and elevators. The Occupational Health and Safety Authority plays the three monkeys when it comes to the lifts in the law courts. They do not have what is minimally required by law: certificate of regular maintenance, and equipment for the people who get stuck in the lift to seek help. Not only that, but the two main lifts in the building are out of order and will be out of order for the next three months, so that old people, handicapped people and the public at large has no access to the court building. But for the Occupational Health and Safety Authority, the laws governing lifts is only for the private sector and for the government.
But going back to the Sea Malta saga; not only are the liquidators making the life of the Sea Malta workers miserable, but they are also asking for a sum of money as guarantee for any damages that the liquidation may encounter should the Court accede to the workers’ request and prohibit the sale of the two vessels. How low can the government go? It is no excuse that the government is not the liquidator – it is the majority shareholder and nothing can be done without its blessing. Poor workers who not only lost their job because of the spite of the others, now have to continue with this ordeal in trying to get what is lawfully theirs by law.
Where was the General Workers Union in all this? This is a legitimate question which might be going through your mind and rightly so because like you I expected these workers to be represented by the legal advisers of the GWU and not by other lawyers. So these workers were not only dumped by the government but now they have also been dumped by their union.
There are a lot of lessons which I learnt last Wednesday in Court during the Sea Malta hearing. First, that the role of the workers’ union nowadays needs to be evaluated; secondly, we need to address the issue of when and at what point in time do the unions have the right to stop their commitment towards their workers; thirdly, that labour laws and health and safety laws do not apply to the government; fourthly, that the workers ultimately are always the ones who suffer most.
In the meantime the families of these 45 or 47 workers continue to pray for a quick end to this saga so that they can get on with their lives. On the other hand, I am sure that the Grimaldis are applying for EU funds to subsidise the sea ferry service to Malta, something which they are entitled to by EU law, but on which the Maltese government never bothered.
By the way, these subsidies are also eligible to the Gozo Channel Company Limited which again, to date, has chosen not to utilise. I hope that there will not be a replica of the Sea Malta saga at the Gozo Channel.
The court case of the Sea Malta workers continues on 17th February at 11am.
|
