-- Posts Summary: Airlines and Airports operating and not operating --

Validated at last. Court says that CAL is the successor

Communication, Transport and General Workers Union (CATTU)
Web site: http://aviationworker.org.tt/
User avatar
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008

Validated at last. Court says that CAL is the successor

Unread post by JoeGons » Mon Oct 09, 2017

On Wednesday 04 October 2017 the Industrial Court handed down it's Ruling on the Case brought by the Communication, Transport and General Workers' Union (CATTU) against Caribbean Airlines and BWIA seeking a declaration that CAL is the successor employer to BWIA and that Certificates of Recognition No. 97 and No. 98 of 1976 are valid, among other things.

See attached;

http://www.workersunion.org.tt/where-we ... ydavesmith

From the Judgment:

Copy and paste.

https://docs.google.com/a/workersunion. ... jA2MGJkYWY


Page 19 of 20


41. From the totality of the evidence we find that the Court was not deprived of jurisdiction to determine this Application. There is no requirement in law for there to be a current subsisting collective agreement between the Parties before this Court can deliberate upon the issue of successorship.

42. We find, from all the evidence, that Caribbean Airlines Limited was the successor employer to BWIA when it commenced its operations as Trinidad and Tobago’s “flag carrier” on 1st January, 2007. We find that CAL conducted substantially the same operations as BWIA, in substantially the same way and with substantially the same categories of workers as did BWIA. We further find that there was substantial continuity of the business enterprise of BWIA by CAL. We make these findings in accordance with good conscience and the principles of good industrial relations practice.

43. We further find that the successor employer, CAL, cannot rid itself of a Recognised Majority Union by asserting that there is no existing collective agreement and that the employees who were represented by the Union are no longer employed with BWIA.


44. It is the ruling of this Court that CAL as the successor to BWIA, is constrained by the provisions of Section 48 of the Act to recognise the Union as one of its Recognised Majority Unions and to honour the terms of the registered collective agreement between the Union and BWIA.

Page 20 of 20

45. We further rule that Certificates of Recognition Nos. 97 and 98 of 1976 are binding on the Parties. The rights of the Union and that of its members are uninterrupted, therefore the successor employer, CAL, is duty bound to honour these rights.

46. It is hereby ordered that Caribbean Airlines Limited do recognise the Union as the Recognised Majority Union of workers of the respective bargaining units for which Certificates Nos. 97 and 98 of 1976 apply.

47. We so rule.

Her Honour Mrs. Deborah-Thomas-Felix
His Honour Mr. Albert Aberdeen
His Honour Mr. Patrick Rabathaly
Her Honour Ms. Bindimattie Mahabir
Her Honour Mrs. Heather Seale

At the end of the delivery of the Ruling, CAL's lawyer petitioned for a Stay in the Judgment, quoting a lot of high court rulings. The Judge tried to dissuade him and granted him 24 hours but he pleaded for more time as he himself is busy with other court matters. The Judge then granted a stay in the Judgment until Monday 09 October at 230 pm.

This is a clear indication that CAL intends to appeal. (Perhaps BWIA as well)

In the Industrial Court, one can only appeal a Court decision on a point of law. In other words, the only grounds for appealing an Industrial Court decision is on a point of law.

I am curious about what point of Law will be the basis for the appeal. They will have to show that their Lordships, you will note that there were five Judges, erred in Law while conducting the Case or in reaching the Judgment.

The Case took 11 years and mostly because of the Company Lawyers objecting to different matters at every opportunity so I wonder what they (the Company Lawyers) missed.

Now remember this.

The Case has been going on for eleven years.

Caribbean Airlines and BWIA both had their own team of Lawyers. Senior Counsel for each Company.

I can only speculate about the cost for this, and of course at the Taxpayer's expense, but the bill must be in the hundreds of thousands.

Now it seems there will be an appeal and the cost will again be at the Taxpayer.

Is the plan to take this to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
If we could do it alone, we would not need each other.


Post Reply

Return to “CATTU - Airline”