The National Executive Council of the St. Lucia Civil Service Association released a Press Statement on March 15, 2016, captioned “Save the Union Withdraws Case against CSA”and implied that it was written by “Save the Union”.
We wish to make it abundantly clear that ‘Save the Union’ had nothing to do with the release from CSA NEC. We do not know whether this inclusion was a deliberate attempt at dividing members, however the group did not issue the release.
Further, and more importantly, the release from the CSA NEC indicates that it was the “Save the Union” that took the court action against the CSA NEC.
- The Claim in the High Court Reference #SLUHCX2016 was between Nine (9) financial members whose names were mentioned as Applicants; nowhere in this court document is ‘Save the Union’ mentioned.
- The claim/request to the Court was for:
- An interim injunction compelling the Respondents (CSA, NEC) to issue notice of the hearing of an extra-Ordinary general meeting pursuant to Section 6.9 (i) of the CSA’s Constitution and
- That the applicant be granted the cost occasioned by the Applicant.
It therefore meant that the aim of the injunction was to have an extra-ordinary meeting for a specific purpose i.e. for members to have an open forum to discuss and decide on the issues faced by the union.
The CSA NEC, after receiving the Court documents in February, submitted its response on March 3rd, 2016 with full knowledge that the set court date was March 8th. This is the modus operandi of the CSA executive-delayed tactics. Having submitted this last minute response made it necessary for the Court to allow the Applicants some time to peruse the CSA’s executive submission and respond appropriately.
The Court’s calendar revealed that a subsequent hearing could not have been scheduled before May/June 2016.
Given that CSA’s Constitution makes provisions for a Biennial Conference scheduled for April/May 2016, a Conference which is at an advanced stage of preparation, the Attorney for the Applicants tactically withdrew the application to allow for the holding of this Conference which includes the election of new officers to constitute the (NEC) National Executive Council.
The withdrawal was in no way as a result of the Applicants lack of a strong case; in fact that Labour Department had earlier this year directed the Executive Council of the CSA to convene this meeting.
Taking all the above into consideration, the Applicants accepted their Attorney’s Advice.
To reiterate, the refusal of the National Executive Council to hold a general membership meeting as directed by over five hundred financial members was the genesis of this Court action.
The fact is that this meeting will be held in April/may 2016 as mandated by the Unions Constitution.