Former Economy and Trade Minister Patrice Minors referred a highly publicised labour dispute to arbitration “because it was politically expedient to do so”, it has been suggested.Lawyers acting for KFC Bermuda made the remark yesterday during a hearing into whether an independent panel should have a right to resolve the stand-off between.The Bermuda Industrial Union called for a boycott of the Queen Street restaurant last April after bosses sought to modify a three-year-old collective bargaining agreement it had with staff.KFC insists that the Minister acted beyond her authority in referring the matter to an arbitration panel, saying that it would infringe on the company’s rights to freely negotiate a new employment contract with staff.And lawyers for the franchise also said that, because the dispute was a minor issue involving only a handful of workers rather than an essential industry, it was not a matter of national importance, and therefore did not need to go to arbitration.“Bermuda may be small and it may be another world, but is it so otherworldly that it cannot cope with a robust dispute involving a handful of workers?” lawyer Peter Sanderson, representing KFC, said.“Yes, the boycott was newsworthy, everyone was very interested in it and everyone wanted to talk about it.“But this was not a dispute that was going to spill out into other industries, so why was it necessary to put a lid on it?“Was it something that was politically expedient because we were in an election year?”The remark was greeted by murmers of disagreement from a number of BIU representatives — including President Chris Furbert — who were in court to observe proceedings.Earlier, legal teams for the Ministry and the BIU had argued that Minister Minors had acted correctly in sending the matter to arbitration.Union lawyer Delroy Duncan said the Minister had attempted to defuse a situation “by taking it off the streets”.And he said an arbitration panel was the only option low-paid workers had in seeking a fair settlement because they could not afford to take any dispute to court.“The Minister was trying to resolve a dispute that was escalating,” Mr Duncan said.“Rather than leave the dispute rolling on in the streets, a mechanism was used to take it off the streets — to take the heat out of the dispute.“It’s easy to say that this was a non-essential industry — ‘we can do what we want and if the workers don’t like it they can take us to court’ — but labour legislation is about not putting workers in that position.“When you look at the range of circumstances that the Minister was facing, I don’t think you can say that the Minister made a decision that was wholly outside the boundaries of her remit.”And representing the Minister, attorney Craig Rothwell said: “This was a situation that the Minister felt needed to be resolved because of the passions that it inflamed within the community.”Much of the two-day hearing was taken up with concerns by KFC Bermuda that any tribunal would be granted “draconian” powers to order and enforce employment terms and conditions if an agreement could not be reached between the two sides.And there were also differences between the legal teams over what the terms of reference should be for any tribunal considering the dispute — and whether Ms Minors was right to outline those terms.Chief Justice Ian Kawaley will issue his ruling at a later date.