BWU’s Blunders in Response to Arrest of KFC Employees

In the aftermath of the recent arrests of two KFC employees, the Barbados Workers' Union (BWU) made swift denunciations, asserting the arrests were illegal and unjust. Venting their frustration on social media platforms, the BWU alleged that the employees had faced unfair termination by KFC prior to their arrest. According to the Deputy Director of the BWU, the union received information indicating that the two employees were instructed by the company to collect their final wages, national insurance certificates, and return their uniforms. However, upon their arrival, they were unexpectedly apprehended by police officers and escorted to the District A Police Station.

In a video statement, a BWU Officer addressed the unfolding situation, emphasizing the union's steadfast commitment to fairness and justice. "We are a responsible institution," they declared, "and just as we do not condone unfair or illegal practices from employers, we equally denounce illegal practices on behalf of our members."

However, as the BWU's narrative unfolded, a closer examination of Barbadian law revealed a different reality, one that cast doubt on the union's assertions. Firstly, the BWU's claim that the arrest was unlawful was debunked by the relevant legal provisions allowing police officers to make arrests without warrants under certain circumstances, as stated in Section 4 of the CHAPTER 125A CRIMINAL LAW (ARRESTABLE OFFENCES) legislation. This includes situations where there are reasonable grounds to suspect someone of committing a crime.

This legal provision completely debunks the BWU's claim that the arrest was unlawful.

Section 4 of the CHAPTER 125A CRIMINAL LAW (ARRESTABLE OFFENCES states in part that:

4. (1) The powers of summary arrest conferred by this section apply to arrestable offences. 

(2) Any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is, or whom he, with reasonable cause, suspects to be, in the act of committing an arrestable offence. 

(3) Where an arrestable offence has been committed, any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is, or whom he, with reason able cause, suspects to be, guilty of the offence. 

(4) Where a police officer, with reasonable cause, suspects that an arrestable offence has been committed, he may arrest without warrant anyone whom he, with reasonable cause, suspects to be guilty of the offence.

Furthermore, the BWU's assertion that this was the first such incident reported by the BWU was challenged by a deeper dive into past cases. As an employment law consultant, I've come across numerous instances where employees, including BWU affiliates, have faced arrests at their workplaces.

Had the BWU officials conducted thorough investigations, they would have discovered that this practice is long-standing, spanning decades. Indeed, there have been instances where the employer called disciplinary meetings to address the question of employees charged with criminal offenses, yet the union declined to participate, citing it as a "police matter."

If the BWU had been attuned to the pulse of recent events, they would have noted an anecdote shared by Caswell Franklyn from the Unity Workers Union. He recounted a recent incident involving an employee he was representing who faced allegations of sexual harassment. Prior to a disciplinary meeting convened by the company regarding these allegations, law enforcement officials arrived unexpectedly and arrested the male employee for sexual assault.

According to Franklyn, the arrest occurred after the female employee, who had lodged the sexual assault complaint, informed the police about the scheduled meeting, including its date and time. This sequence of events sheds light on the intricate dynamics surrounding workplace disputes and the intersection of employment matters with law enforcement actions.

Moreover, the BWU's suggestion that the employees' unawareness of the investigation into their alleged offense exonerates them oversimplifies the situation. Awareness of an investigation doesn't determine guilt or innocence, and individuals may still be held accountable for their actions.

As the saga unfolds, it's evident that the BWU's response was marred by ignorance and haste. Moving forward, it's imperative for the BWU to consult with legal experts before making public statements that could mislead or misinform the public. We must demand better from our labour unions, ensuring they uphold the highest standards of advocacy and representation for workers across Barbados.