The National Labour Commission (NLC) has started processes at the High Court to compel university administrators and managers to go back to work.
The move is in accordance with Section 172 of the Labour Act 2004.
The provision stipulates that “where a person fails or refuses to comply with a direction or order issued by the Commission under this Act, the Commission shall make an application to the High Court for an order to compel that person to comply with the direction or order.”
The Executive Secretary of the NLC, Mr Edward Biriku-Boadu, who disclosed this to the Daily Graphic, said the commission had proof of the Ghana Association of University Administrators (GAUA), having received their directive to resume work, although executives of GAUA interviewed maintained they had received no such directive.
The defiance of GAUA to the directive has necessitated the action by the NLC.
GAUA on Tuesday, held a press conference to highlight the fact that the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC), was short-changing them with respect to the payment of market premiums.
While they had made a proposal of a 1.20 market premium factor, the FWSC had offered a .80 factor.
They insisted that since no guidelines had yet been developed on market premiums, whatever market premium factor being used by the FWSC had to be applied to all equally.
However, the Director of Grievance, Negotiation and Collective Bargaining at the FWSC, Mr Cornelius Yawson told the Daily Graphic that GAUA was being disingenuous and hiding behind professionals among their ranks to compel the payment of a higher market premium to them.
He explained that GAUA had among its ranks professionals like doctors, and that was being used by the association to demand a higher market premium.
Mr Yawson said the payment of the market premium was dependent on skills so the FWSC had suggested that skill sets within the association should be desegregated so that the appropriate market premium would be targeted at particular skill sets and not for members of the association as a whole, regardless of their skills and expertise to enjoy the market premium.
With regards to agitations by pharmacists for their early migration onto the Single Spine Salary Structure (SSSS), Mr Yawson said pharmacists were migrated but later asked for a suspension of the exercise pending the resolution of their grievances, which bordered on the relativities in the salary structure between themselves and other health professionals.
He said their concerns went before the Grievance Review Committee, a statutory independent body set up to oversee concerns in relation to the implementation of the SSSS.
The committee ruled but the pharmacists failed to adhere to the ruling or appeal, consequently, they were now time barred.
Mr Yawson said the way forward was for the executives to sit with the FWSC and redress the relativities in relation to some ranks.
He said the resort to ministers or other bodies by workers aggrieved with processes was not helpful as the President had himself given the promise not to interfere in the work of the FWSC, to allow the growth of the institution.