Cay HILL:--- On Thursday, December 7th, 2023, teachers of the FAVE school board requested a meeting with the WITU to discuss a few pressing issues. Among the issues were the COLA, the matter of the policy, as it pertains to legal support for which a 10% is now required as payment to the WITU, provided that the client supported by WITU has won the court case, and an unresolved matter concerning a few members that has been dragging on for almost a year now.
During the meeting, Mr. Mcwilkin, a former member of the WITU board, raised the question of the 10% remuneration fee associated with legal representation which the WITU has added. Mr. Mcwilkin asked Mr. Johnson what happens if members do not agree with the new policy. He went on to suggest that the policy needs to be reversed until members’ concerns are brought back to the WITU board. In addition, Mr. Mcwilkin indicated that a proper meeting should be held with all members to solicit suggestions and votes. Mr. Mcwilkin pointed out that at this moment, such a policy brings uneasiness since anything can happen at any time and then it is at the discretion of the WITU, which is not conducive to trust in fairness and transparency since members contribute monthly to ensure that their legal position is secured; which is a key benefit. Mr. Mcwilkin also pointed out that while he was a member of the board, Mrs. Elshot, took on all cases of teachers who needed help. He indicated that teachers are contributing a lot to the WITU, fortunately, court cases are not everyday occurrences. Furthermore, he pointed out that if the WITU has financial problems, it should consider cutting back on monies used to run the organization.
In response, Mr. Johnson said there will be no reversal of the decision at this point until he has a meeting with the entire WITU membership, however, there is consideration to take this matter back to the WITU board. Mr. Mcwilkin pointed out to Mr. Johnson that the WITU changed the policy without the approval of members, so, how can the union president say that he would keep this policy? Mr. Mcwilkin pointed out that the stance of the WITU president is not correct. In response, Mr. Johnson said the governance of the WITU is at the discretion of the board.
Members vote in an election for the president and other members are chosen by the president. Based on the formation of the WITU board, the governance is based on the board. Mr. Mcwilkin then put the following question to Mr. Johnson, ‘Are you saying that the board of the WITU could run the organization without members?’. Mr. Mcwilkin also pointed out to Mr. Johnson that the new policy where members have to pay 10% did not have the signatures of members to support it. In response, Mr. Johnson spoke of the need for the WITU to be ‘transparent’ in the way it operates.
Two other members of staff took Mr. Johnson to task on the matter of support. He was asked why he did not give any support in the dispute with Nipa in which the NIPA school board did not honor the terms of the permanent contract signed between the parties. Mr. Johnson responded that the board of the WITU did not think that the case had enough grounds to be turned over to the WITU’s lawyer. Upon hearing this, another member put forward his concern that the union leader was too friendly with school board members and as a result, justice is not served when such matters arise. Another member complained about seeking Mr. Johnson's assistance several times but was denied. She in turn had to seek the assistance of her colleague to have the problem solved. The teachers present were disappointed with Stuart Johnson’s response and the WITU president was strongly urged to revisit both cases, which he promised to do. However, to date, nothing has been heard from Stuart Johnson.
