SARCASLE LTD.

On his return to work from leave on January 11, 1988, 4r. Henry Smith, Personnel Manager of Barcastle r.td. in Barbados, knew that he would be forced to make an urgent decision. He had visited the company for a short while on Friday, January 8, 1988, when the General Manager (Ag), Mr. St.Clair Brewster, informed him that he had suspended Mr. Timothy James, a production worker and shop steward, for the remainder of that day for refusing to comply with a managerial request. After officially discussing the incident with Mr. Brewster and other members of the Management team at Barcastle Ltd., Mr. Smith invited Timothy to explain the circumstances surrounding his suspension. Not only had Timothy refused to comment, but the President of the “local” union, Mr. John Francis, who had accom panied Timothy, informed Mr. Smith that the issue had been referred to the National Workers Union. Mr.. Smith referred James to Section 4 of the Code of Discipline (See Exhibits I-lit for selected articles from the Collective Agreement) and informed Timothy that his suspension would remain effective until the circumstances were investigated. Mr. Smith wanted to have wanted to be sure that company. He wrote the brief ly the circumstances a meeting.
General Company 9ackground

this issue settled quickly. Yet, he he could defend any action taken by the Union the following day, explaining of Timcthy’s suspension, and requested

Barcastle Ltd.. was a public company registered in 1939. It corn rnenced operations in September 1961. It manufactured a select range of products sold on the local market. The company had a generally high public profile both in terms of the quality of its products and their popularity with consumers, and its level of involvement in and support for community activities.

This case was written by Lawrence Nurse during the 1988 Case Writing Workshop, Regional Management Development Pilot Project, UWI/tJSAID.

Case Material is ‘orepared as a basis for classroom discussion. Copyright (c) 1988, The University of the West Indies Regional Management Development Pilot Project. 92 and the

r

employed one hundred and ten (110) per In 1987, Barcastle Ltd. sons, twenty-five (25) of whom constituted the clerical, ad Eighty-f i’re (85) workers ministrative and professional staff. were employed in the three (3) sections of its production depart Relations with the workers and their union had been ment. The company concluded its first collective generally cordial. agreement with the Union in 1970. The Conversion Department The conversion department received and processed the raw material Because of the nature of the company’s for the final product. product, a high premium was placed on the maintenance of hygenic conditions in this and other departments. Twenty-two (22) employees worked on a three-shift-system in the The standard shifts were 7.00 a.m.-3.00 conversion department. There was a p.m.; 3.00 p.m.—10.00 pm. and 10.00 p.m.—7.00 a..m. shift assistant assisted by shift-supervisors, superintendent, supervisors and shift relief supervisors in different areas of Two operators also worked on each of the conversion department. shifts. the three The activities performed in this department were critical to the At the lowest level of the produc quality of the final product. tion line, the raw materials were received in bulk and fed into a bin, from which it is fed through a conveyor belt into the boiler The semi-finished product section of the plant for processing. passed through different stages before final packaging. The Incident Suspension of Timothy James

-

Timothy James worked at the begin.ning of the production line in He had the raw material handling section of the department. joined the company in 1969 as a casual worker in the packaging In 1972 he was transferred to the conversion depart department. In December 1972, he was warned for sleeping on the job. ment. In February 1973, he was given a raise in pay on satisfactory Nothing extraordinary seemed to have completion of training. characterised his work history up until 1984, when he received The conferal of such an the company’s fifteen (15) year award. longer had to “clock-in or out”. award meant that Timothy no As part of their normal routine duties, operators were required to keep the area around the bin free from extraneous matter. Each operator was required to perform that duty once every six (6) weeks for a week. 93

On Friday, January 8, 1988, Leroy Drakes, the shift supervisor on Timothy’s shift, noticed that there was extraneous matter around the bn. Drakes twice drew the above to his attention. Timothy refused to comply, ‘the shift stpervisor drew the matter to the attention of the Departmental Superintendent, Mr. Edward Jacobs. The latter requested Timothy to perform the function, but he again refused. Jacobs then reported the incident to St.Clair Brewster, who as (Ag.) General Manager, was also a Com pany Director and the Plant Manager. Mr. Brewster, in the presence of both Messrs Drakes and Jacobs, instructed Timothy James that if he had no intention of perform ing the function, he (James) would be suspended, pending inves tgaticn. James was advised by Brewster to “go home” and to return to work on the following day. James complied. The Personnel Manager requested James to see him since he wanted to have the matter resolved before further conflict developed. Mr. Smith was aware that stocks of the company’s product were low as a result of the heavy sales during the previous month. An in terruption in production was therefore not in the company’s best interests.

9

EXHIBIT I • BARCASTLE LTD. Code of Discipline Sections 4 and 5

DISCIPLINARY ACTION OFFENCE 1st OFFENCE 2nd OFEENCE 3rd. OFFENCE

4. Insuordination or rudensss

Suspension or Dismissal Suspension or Dismissal

Dismissal

5.Wilful disobedience of reasonable instructions

Dismissal

EXHIBIT II BARCASTLE tTD. Management’s Rights Clause

1.

Employees are obligated Supervisor’s instructions.

to

carry

out

their

immediate

2.

The Company offers employment and will pay for same on the understanding that a standard is produced in return for the wage paid.’ It is understood that the general duty of all is to produce the best possible products according to modern standards of hygiene and to offer the utmost satisfaction to the general public. The Union recognises the exclusive right of the Company to organjee, conduct, and manage their operations to provide for efficiency arid to perform other functions of Management such as, but not limited to, the introduction of technical improvement, to modify or cease operations, to designate the type of work and the manner in which it is to be ac complished provided however, that in the exercise of these rights this agreement is in no way violated arid further provided that the Union may at any time raise any matter with Management in the scope of this agreement.

3.

4.

The Company has the right at the discretion of Management to reprimand, engage, transfer, retrench. promote, demote, The Union suspend employees and dismiss ciem for cause. will be informed of proposed or intended retrenchments.

••

•‘

“

.1’

EXHIBIT lit

BARCASTLE LTD. Procedure for the Avoidance and Settlement of Disputes 1. All requests complaints 1 and differences must, in the instance, be discussed with first his the worker immediately concern /her immediate Supervisor, by ed. After the procedure laid dow n in carried out, and if no satisfa Paragraph I above has been ctory set rived at, the Delegate shall enter int tlement has been ar o discussion with Supervisor, before any discip linary action is carried out the . Failing settlement under Paragr aph 2 above, Management sha be contacted and will invest ll ation with the worker, the Su igate the problem in consult pervisor and Delegates. Failing settlement under Paragr workers who may be accompan aph 3 above, deputations of Union shall be received by the ied by an Officer of the Trade delay, for the mutual discus Employer without unreasonable sio settlement of which both partiesn of any question in the are concerned. Failing set:lement under the abo ve Paragraph 4, it shall be competent for either party to bring the question before joint conference to be held a between the Trade Union. Such a joint conference shall Company and the be held within seven (7) working days, unl ess otherwise mutually agreed upon, from the receipt of the application by the Secretary of the Company or the Secretary of the Trade Union. Failing settlement under Paragraph 5 above, either side may request the Barbados Employers’ Confederation to convene a joint conference to further discus s the matters in dispute. Failing settlement at the joint Paragraph of any question broughconference, under the above t 0 it shall be competent for either party to before it refer the question to the Chief Labour Of ficer for conciliation.

2.

3.

4.

3.

6.

7.

97