PSA terminal workers reject arbitration and support strike

He Industrial union of port and land workers in cargo service (SITRASECAPOT) refused to update Ministry of Labor and Labor Development (Mitradel) amid the announcement of a strike at the PSA Panama International Terminal of the Port of Rodman.

He SITRASECAPOT He pointed out that the strike, which was scheduled for Thursday, June 1 at 6 a.m., started late because the company was “blocking” the actions of the Ministry of Labor.

The workers’ union confirms that the Ministry of Labor conducted a secret voting procedure, which ended with a result of 319 votes for the strike and 8 votes against; that is, 98% of the workers who voted supported the strike.

However SITRASECAPOT he decried the hasty manner in which Mitradel officials closed the polls, which they say prevented many workers from exercising their right to vote.

“Having comrades in line, they were denied the opportunity to vote,” SITRASECAPOT added in a statement.

It will be up to the Regional Labor Administration of Western Panama to issue a Resolution evaluating the results of the vote, in order to define whether the closure of the company will be maintained or will continue to allow for the reactivation of operations.

The union called on PSA Panama International Terminal workers to report to work at the scheduled time.

After learning about the announcement of the strike, the country’s business and logistics sector spoke up. The shipping company MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA warned of the impact of the labor crisis facing the port terminal both on its activities, as well as on the work of the Panama Canal and the logistics industry in general.

In this regard, the union rejected the information that emerged regarding the count, as well as the call for arbitration by the Panamanian Chamber of Commerce.

“He SITRASECAPOT has exhausted efforts to reach a peaceful resolution of the conflict and we have offered the company viable alternatives to comply with the Collective Agreement and redress the damages to workers as a result of their violations; however, the hostile attitude of the new administration towards the workers and towards the union, the excessive expansion of their legal advisers, are responsible for the conflict reaching these levels,” the union defended itself.

He reiterated his readiness for dialogue in order to find a solution to the conflict as soon as possible, which would allow our colleagues to return to work with a guarantee of compliance with the Collective Agreement.