Bashing Tony Zarb

Over the decades the General Workers Union has always served as a convenient punching bag for the PN, especially in times of trouble. The GWU's leadership has not been entirely blameless in providing ammunition to its adversaries.

What the PN is trying to sell through the publication of the edited recording of Tony Zarb's declarations in a private meeting with a cleaning contractor and two mediators, is that under a future Labour government companies enjoying the good graces of the GWU will have an advantage over others.

Tony Zarb is heard suggesting the union may "give a push" in tendering processes to companies that are friendly with it, and that this will be even more the case if the government changes.

Taken in isolation these comments suggest that Zarb crossed a line by suggesting that he can wield some sort of influence on the tendering process. But one also has to put things in perspective.

Tony Zarb is not part of the government and has no influence whatever in the award of tenders. Therefore describing this case as 'tendergate' (as done in the PBS website) is one of the greatest exaggerations of this campaign. Neither did Zarb suggest any corrupt practices. At most it suggests a hint at trading in interest.

Zarb is also entitled to the view that companies involved in dubious employment practices should not be awarded tenders by government and this should be even more the case if a Labour government is elected. 

But this is not what Zarb said. Had Zarb limited himself to say this, he would be blameless. Unfortunately his unclear choice of words suggests otherwise.

Crucially the meeting in question was held after the General Workers' Union newspaper had carried out a series of articles on precarious employment, which referred directly to Dominic Gafà's cleaning company, which is regularly awarded tenders by government.

Therefore the context of the meeting was the GWU's legitimate defense of workers employed in this sector.

Moreover the employment practices of cleaning companies, which are given contracts by government, has been questioned not just by the GWU but even national agencies like the National Commission for Equality.

54% of cleaning workers who were found to be employed in breach of employment regulations, had cleaning-duty placements inside government departments, public authorities, and public hospitals - a survey by the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality among 602 vulnerable employees, 210 of which were cleaners, found. "Clearly, immediate measures must be taken by government to set more stringent specifications when issuing public tender calls for cleaning services to safeguard against cleaning tender projects being awarded to cleaning contractors employing vulnerable workers," the NCPE said.

The survey revealed that 19% of respondents working in the cleaning industry indicated that their existing wage/hourly rate was below the minimum wage stipulated by law. Moreover 34% of those interviewed were not even formally registered with their employer.

50% of respondents said they were not entitled to sick leave and 38% said they were not allowed to take a formal break. Only 26% said they are paid a government-mandated bonus; the necessary safety equipment by their employers did not provide 43%; and 48% observed the presence of irregularly employed individuals at their workplace. Additionally only 41% have their national insurance (NI) contributions paid jointly by their employer and themselves. 39% of those interviewed do not pay any NI contributions.

All those present in the meeting except contractor Dominic Gafa have denied recording the meeting where Tony Zarb is heard making the dubious remarks.

This raises the question; was the PN is collusion with Gafa in the covert recording of the meeting? And how does this tally with reports of precarious conditions in the sub contracting of cleaning services in the public sector? Does this tell anything on the lack of enforcement prevailing in this sector?  

Surely one can argue that the publication of this recording was justified by the overriding national interest, as was arguably the case with recordings involving the former mayor of Sliema Johanna Gonzi and former PN councillor Julian Galea by Labour.

But it is equally legitimate to question the source and intentions of those providing these covert recordings especially when they are also in receipt of government tenders.

Unfortunately except for the Greens, none of the parties contesting this election are giving due importance to the issue of precarious employment and both major parties hint at farming out more services to the private sector which runs a profit simply because it offers lower employment safeguards.

Over the past weeks the PN has questioned Labour's ties with big business. But does not this particular case suggest direct collusion between a businessman in receipt of government tenders and a political party in hitting out against a common adversary?