The Chemical, Energy and Printing Section of the General Workers Union (GWU) yesterday suspended the industrial action called early in the morning at Enemalta Corporation, following an urgent meeting between the union and the corporation’s workers’ committee.

Before the industrial action was called off, the corporation had issued a press statement replying to recent comments by the GWU, which had called the industrial action because it had not yet received Enemalta’s proposals for a new collective agreement.

Enemalta said it had spoken directly with GWU officials, informing them that it would provide them with the final draft of a collective agreement on 14 March.

However, it added, just two days before this date, the GWU felt it was justified to order industrial action aimed at causing inconvenience to consumers trying to get through to Enemalta.

The GWU had taken this decision after months of dragging its feet over the implementation of reforms to work practices at Enemalta, the corporation said.

“This hostile attitude is not a good sign for the negotiations on a collective agreement that will start on Friday,” it added.

The corporation appealed to the GWU to show a more constructive attitude in the discussions.

Later in the day, the GWU said that officials from the union and Enemalta had discussed the collective agreement that expired in 2005.

The GWU had decided to suspend industrial action after Enemalta had informed the GWU in writing that it will forward its proposals on the collective agreement to the union by tomorrow.

Section secretary Rebecca Gatt said that unless the management keeps its word, the industrial action will resume the next day, on Thursday.

Ms Gatt pointed out that the industrial action was suspended as an act of goodwill after an intervention made by the Employment and Industrial Relations Director.

However, she added, if the proposals on the collective agreement do reach the union tomorrow, the section will insist that the first meeting is held on Thursday at 9am.

“As opposed to what was claimed by Enemalta, the GWU is determined to start discussing the collective agreement,” said Ms Gatt.

She added that the GWU is a pillar of Maltese trade unionism and it certainly would not be Enemalta that would determine how the negotiations will take place.

Enemalta management always had a negative attitude towards its employees and is always ready to point fingers at them, said Ms Gatt.

Furthermore, she said, the GWU had sent three letters to the corporation’s management – on 11 September 2006, 28 December 2006 and 16 February 2007 – requesting the proposals for the collective agreement.

However, she added, the union never received any reaction except that discussions are taking place in the government’s collective bargaining unit.

It was only after the GWU announced it was calling industrial action that the management decided to give its replies in two days, she said.

The GWU also denied dragging its feet over certain issues, especially with reference to the recent reforms the management wants to implement.

Ms Gatt said it was unfair for the corporation’s management to blame the workers for its inefficiency, especially where customer service is concerned.

The truth of the matter is, she said, that the management itself does not know what it wants but is imposing criteria that, it claims, are based on what the EU wants.

Ms Gatt added that while the management accused the GWU of dragging its feet, it had kept silent on how the corporation was itself not taking action over the dangerous working environment.

“Instead of addressing the problems and health and safety hazards these workers have to face, it is unjustly accusing them simply because they are standing up for their rights,” she said.

The industrial action called by the union was also a reminder that the union finds the breach of the collective agreements unacceptable, said Ms Gatt.

She added that the union regretted that a number of customers had been affected by the industrial action.