The Ghana National Association of Teachers (GNAT) has formally petitioned the National Labour Commission (NLC) to dismiss a complaint filed by Innovative Teachers seeking compulsory inclusion in national conditions of service negotiations.
In a response submitted by its legal counsel, Legal Alliance, GNAT contends that the unfair labour practice complaint lacks legal foundation and misinterprets the statutory framework governing collective bargaining in Ghana.
Innovative Teachers had filed a complaint with the NLC requesting an order to compel GNAT to include its representatives on the standing negotiating committee for public school teachers.
However, GNAT submitted that under the Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651), negotiating authority resides exclusively with the holder of the collective bargaining certificate.
“GNAT holds the collective bargaining certificate for teaching staff of the Ghana Education Service. The Complainant does not,” the response stated, citing Section 99 and Section 101 of Act 651.
Addressing the unfair labour practice charge, GNAT clarified that Section 127 of Act 651 primarily regulates actions between employers and employees regarding employment conditions, rather than internal trade union administration.
“GNAT is a trade union, not an employer of teachers. GNAT does not determine the conditions of employment of teachers. That function belongs to the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission and the Ghana Education Service,” the response noted.
The association further argued that any collective agreement negotiated by GNAT automatically extends to all teachers within the Ghana Education Service, including members of rival or uncertified unions, ensuring no discrimination in outcome.
GNAT also addressed Regulation 10(1) of the Labour Regulations, 2007 (L.I. 1833), drawing a line between mandatory consultation and discretionary invitation to participate in negotiations.
“Consultation is mandatory. The use of the word ‘shall’ before ‘consult’ imposes a binding duty on the certificate holder to consult other unions representing the same class of workers… However, invitation to participate in negotiations is discretionary,” the response stated.
GNAT argued that compelling a certificate holder to admit every emerging union or splinter group to its negotiating committee would render the bargaining process unworkable.
“If GNAT were compelled to admit every rival or splinter union to its negotiating committee, the committee would become unworkable. Negotiations would be severely hampered,” the response warned, noting that past inclusion of groups such as NAGRAT constituted strategic discretion rather than a legal precedent.
GNAT requested the Commission to refrain from interfering with internal union governance, maintaining that the relief sought by Innovative Teachers cannot be granted under existing labour laws.
By:Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
