Elaine and Dadds Joseph Consultancy

30/10/2025

The struggle is real my people

26/10/2025

02/06/2025

Know your rights at work.

26/05/2025

Pay me for my PERSONAL time.

17/02/2025

I have been in the Labor Field for the last 30 years plus, so I believe I have a reasonable understanding of the Labor Laws in our country.

It has always been, to the best of my knowledge, that 30% of the employees within an employment space, who want to be unionized, would approach a union and the said union would write to the Labour Department to begin the process of becoming the Bargaining Agent for these employees.

The Labour Department would then write to the employer for a list of their employees in order to make sure that the names presented to the Labour Department are indeed employees and that they make up 30% of the prospective Bargaining Unit.

THE NAMES GIVEN TO THE LABOUR DEPARTMENT ARE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE EMPLOYER.

Once the Labour Department is satisfied that the threshold has been reached, a count is taken and the Bargaining Agent with the most votes, FIFTY PERCENT PLUS 1 OF THE EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE BARGAINING UNIT, would become the Bargaining Agent.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE 30% THRESHOLD HAVE NEVER BEEN THE PROBLEM. NEVER.

The problem has been, once some employer becomes aware that the employees want to be unionized, they would, THROUGH CREATIVE WAYS, begin to SUBTLY INTIMIDATE the workers in order for them to NOT vote in favour of a union of their choice.

I am hearing on the radio that government is thinking of reducing the 30% threshold to 15%.

I DO NOT KNOW THAT THIS SOLVES THE PROBLEM OR A PROBLEM BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS THE SUBTLE PRESSURE THAT IS PUT ON EMPLOYEES, BY SOME EMPLOYERS, ONCE IT BECOMES KNOWN THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GET UNIONIZED.

It is my belief that the reason for the proposed reduction is person or persons are trying to reduce the threshold in order TO BE SURE to get a number of persons expressing interest in a particular ‘new union’ so that they can call for another count in a particular industry.

If these person or persons are successful, it will be interesting to see if a union might seek to challenged the Antigua Trades & Labour Union within the
Non-Establish sector.

Let us see how it unfolds.

28/11/2024

You can't say you did not hear.

Fights fought and WON in the past should not be brought back to be fought again by the present or future generations.

25/11/2024

I went to a meeting at the Labour Department today and when I heard the Employer Representative I was like this little girl.

Wow.

19/11/2024

In the 1930’s, based on how workers were been treated in Antigua (and the territory), a Commission known as THE MOYNE COMMISSION was held, and coming out of that Commission and based on advice that a team of men & women, to include Sir V.C. Bird received, THEY FOUGHT AND BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE, THE ANTIGUA TRADES & LABOUR UNION.

THE ANTIGUA TRADES & LABOUR UNION WAS FORMED/REGISTERED IN 1939 and it was devoted to making life better for the struggling worker. It was an organization that defended workers.

Many a battles for the betterment of workers have been fought over the decades and we today owe a debt of gratitude to our ancestors.

Many a battles have been fought in the Industrial Court and many a gains have been won from challenges in the Industrial Court.

I am aware of a case at the Antigua and Barbuda Hospitality Training Institute (A.B.H.T.I.) and THE MERITS OF THIS CASE HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED ON IN OUR APPEALS COURT AND SUBSEQUENTLY MANY TIMES IN OUR INDUSTRIAL COURT. THIS CASE IS AS STRAIGHT-FORWARD AS IT COMES.

At this stage in the matter, the Antigua and Barbuda Hospitality Training Institute (A.B.H.T.I.) have rejected a recommendation from the Labour Department; hence, the matter will go forward to the Industrial Court. That is just how the process works.

I am troubled however by the fact that the Antigua Trades & Labour Union sits on the Board of Directors of the Antigua and Barbuda Hospitality Training Institute (A.B.H.T.I.) and if there is an Industrial Matter to be tried, THE A.T. & L.U., A UNION AND A SUPPOSED WORKERS ORGANIZATION, sits with EMPLOYERS AGAINST employees.

Something is not right with that picture to me.

I AM EVEN MORE TROUBLED THAT THE A.T. & L.U. APPARENTLY COULD GO AGAINST THE RIGHTS OF AN EMPLOYEE IN A MATTER THAT HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED AND SETTLED BEFORE THE COURT.

I say apparently because I am not aware of the advice that the Union Representative might have given to the Board of Directors but let me hasten to say that whatever the advice that was given should be made public in the name of transparency.

We shall see how this matter ends up once it is adjudicated; taking into consideration established legal rulings that already exists.

05/09/2024

Well, it looks like the Teachers Union na agree with the Mighty Sparrow.

DEM NA LIKE IT SO TARL!!!

01/09/2024

I listened to a conversation about “indigenous Antiguans” are competing for jobs in THEIR OWN COUNTRY being put at risk because they are competing with other Caribbean nationals because of ‘free movement’ and I just smiled and said to myself, HOW STUPID OF SOME INDIGENOUS ANTIGUANS.

Since, other nationals can come to my country and put me out of a job because where they are coming from do not have a ‘minimum wage’ EVEN HALF OF WHAT IS HERE, why am I voting for politicians who support this scheme around here?

I guess some ‘indigenous Antiguans’ love it so.

14/08/2024

History is full of accounts of the demise of BAD MINDED PEOPLE who strut around as if they are so decent when they very well could be considered among the scum of the earth.

I was born into the Seventh Day Adventist family.

From time to time when an Adventist would fall short in the eyes of some, or when you as an Adventist would declare what denomination you identify with, you would hear the comment "ANOTHER BADVENTIST".

LUKE 12:48 SAYS: But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. FOR UNTO WHOMSOEVER MUCH IS GIVEN, OF HIM SHALL BE MUCH REQUIRED: AND TO WHOM MEN HAVE COMMITTED MUCH, OF HIM THEY WILL ASK THE MORE.

It did not speak to any one denomination but as it is with life, sometimes some people (denomination) are given baskets to carry water.

School children say that a person who says he is of the Seventh Day Adventist Faith have sold his business or some of his business assets and is proposing to pay his employees over a six (6) month period.

Incidentally, most of his employees are of the Adventist Faith.

School children say, since the sale, fence have gone up around his private residence and vehicle or vehicles have been bought but he want to pay his Seventh Day Adventist Employees over a six (6) month period.

EXODUS 34: 7 says: Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

Do we really wonder why when the public sees a person on the Church Podium, participating in Sabbath Worship and presenting himself and his family as
HOLIER-THAN-THOU, sees and knows how this person lives on Sundays through Fridays, they say "OH ANOTHER BADVENTIST"?

If I see myself and this DESPICABLE VULTURE in the same place on JUDGMENT DAY, I would know immediately that I am in a place that I AM STRIVING TO AVOID.

24/05/2024

You know, when I think about Antigua and how matters (government & private) work, I just shake my head in disbelief.

This place cannot be a real place.

An employee reported to work a day and he began feeling unwell. He had to leave to go home because of how he felt. He did not exceed the 12 days spoken to in the Labour Code so that meant that his employer was duty-bound by way of law to pay him for the day.

Can you believe that ‘a person’ recommended this: It is difficult to come to a decision based on the information presented. Neither party has presented sufficient information for a definitive decision to be made. Therefore, I am unable to find in favour of either party.

Another employee did not report to work on a day when he was unwell. He did not exceed the 12 days spoken to in the Labour Code so that meant that his employer was duty-bound by way of law to pay him for the day. He was not paid for the day.

On another day, the same employee was on his way to work and when he was I close proximity to his work-place, his employer telephoned him and told him that he (the employer) is unwell, hence, he will not be opening up his workplace the said day. The employee was not paid for that day.

Can you believe that ‘a person’ recommended this: It is difficult to come to a decision based on the information presented. Neither party has presented sufficient information for a definitive decision to be made. Therefore, I am unable to find in favour of either party.

Is this place a real place? This has gone beyond the stage of being a joke.

Dis place ya gone.