their overtime ban today.

An injunction against the Bermuda Industrial Union port workers division was granted, and was served on the relevant parties late yesterday.

It is hoped that the employees, who imposed an overtime ban after disagreements over payments for overlapping call-out periods, will return to normal working when the injunction is received.

The company had hoped the workers would drop the ban before legal action was necessary, but pursued the injunction yesterday when it became evident that would not be the case.

Bermuda Industrial Union president Derrick Burgess said the practice of separate "call-outs'', before and after meals, had been going on for 25 years -- and now the company wanted to change it, which he said was "puzzling''.

But Stevedoring Services president Michael Lohan disputed those claims as "rubbish'', saying there had always been one call-out fee to perform a job, and the time following a meal hour did not start a new call-out period.

The dispute centres around guaranteed overtime payments when workers are called out to tend ships out of normal hours.

On a call-out, men are guaranteed a minimum of two hours pay which, at double time, equates to four hours pay. So, even if the work lasts just 15 minutes, the men still get the minimum fee, which at approximately $20 an hour brings them $80.

On a normal working day the meal hour is from 4.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. The unions are arguing if staff take a meal break -- even if a call-out started at 4 p.m. -- then their return to work after dinner should be treated as a new call-out.

Stevedoring Services say there is no extra call-out fee, and the initial call-out stands until the job in hand is finished.

They say the meal hour is the worker's prerogative, but a return to the job one hour later does not constitute a new call-out period -- and another guaranteed minimum of four hours pay.

Both Mr. Phillips and William Pearce argue that such details are necessary before they begin spending tax payers money.

"On Monday, September 14, in my office, Ms Marshall finally agreed to provide the plan,'' Mr. Phillips said.

"That was the only agreement reached -- Ms Marshall's account of that meeting is a total misrepresentation.

"On Tuesday, September 15, the Solicitor General and I again met with Ms Marshall and her attorney, Mr. Phillip Perinchief and she promised again to produce the plan. As at 5 p.m. today Ms Marshall has not provided any plan.

"The Department has never wavered from its commitment to this conference and the potential it has to further enhance our efforts to attract African American visitors. The World Conference of Mayors knows this fact and so does Ms Marshall.'' Yesterday Mr. Pearce declined to comment on Ms Marshall's allegations but added that he was disappointed that they had been made public.

"I have been branded virtually a racist and I have no comeback,'' he said.

Last night Ms Marshall's lawyer, Phil Perinchief, confirmed that a detailed marketing plan had still not been produced.

But he said that his client would produce a fully comprehensive document and present it to Mr. Phillips this morning.

And he hinted that, if the document was produced and the remaining $65,000 was subsequently paid up by the department any legal action by Ms Marshall could be dropped.

But when Mr. Perinchief was asked why his client had been unable to come up with a detailed marketing strategy, even though it was a key clause in the contract signed back in May, he was unable to answer.

"I will have to take further instruction but things are just moving along so quickly,'' he said.