The full-time president of the Bermuda Union of Teachers was formally reinstated to her teaching job last month after being fired by the Commissioner of Education.

But a source told The Royal Gazette there was concern about whether the union was still paying Nishanthi Bailey’s salary, at the same time as it deals with a lawsuit brought against it by an ousted former member, the Reverend Leonard Santucci.

The source, who asked not to be identified, claimed that the union was mired in disputes at a time when it needed to focus on and speak out about the Government’s plan to reform the public education system.

The source also questioned how the two matters were affecting the union’s finances.

"She was reinstated but does the salary still come out of BUT's coffers? That's the question,“ they said.

“Does the membership know that the president may still not be being paid by the MoEd [Ministry of Education]?"

A different source, citing the union's decision to appeal Ms Bailey's dismissal before a labour tribunal and the cost of defending Dr Santucci's civil action, claimed: “They have spent a truckload of money.”

Ms Bailey was dismissed by Kalmar Richards, the Commissioner of Education, after she failed to show up for her job as a drama teacher at Dellwood Middle School in November 2021.

At the time, she had been seconded as full-time BUT president for more than a year.

The union — which had asked Ms Richards to allow Ms Bailey to remain seconded as full-time president — went to a labour tribunal to appeal.

It won last June, when the panel expressed its “astonishment” and disappointment at Ms Richards’s refusal to attend a meeting with the union to try to resolve the row.

The decision also detailed how Ms Bailey failed to respond to e-mails or attend meetings about her absence from work.

The tribunal ordered that Ms Bailey be “reinstated immediately” and in September last year she told a Labour Day crowd that she had won her case.

But Ms Richards did not immediately reinstate Ms Bailey.

Instead, The Royal Gazette understands from the first source, the Commissioner and Derrick Binns, the head of the Public Service, initiated legal proceedings to challenge the tribunal ruling.

A Ministry of Education spokeswoman said this week: “Ms Bailey has been reinstated and currently continues in her secondment role with the BUT.”

She added: “The reinstatement was processed on March 8, 2023. The reinstatement was processed retroactive to June 24, 2022.“

The spokeswoman said Ms Bailey was granted an extension for her secondment until June 30 this year.

Asked if Ms Richards and Dr Binns were challenging the tribunal’s ruling, she replied: “No. Ms Bailey was employed by the Department of Education when terminated and appealed her dismissal.

“The Department of Education was ordered to reinstate Ms Bailey by the tribunal determination. The appeal of that decision was withdrawn.”

The spokeswoman did not respond to further questions about the legal challenge and about which entity paid Ms Bailey’s salary since her dismissal.

The union has been embroiled in the rows over Ms Bailey’s job and Dr Santucci's suspension since 2021, as the Government has moved forward with its controversial plan to reform public education.

The first dispute hinged on a 1981 agreement the union had with the Department of Education allowing BUT officers to be seconded from their teaching jobs.

Ms Bailey was allowed the secondment initially but Ms Richards refused a two-year extension and ordered the BUT president back to work on November 1, 2021.

The commissioner cited a shortage of teachers with Ms Bailey’s skill set as the reason and argued that the 1981 agreement was not still in effect.

When Ms Bailey failed to return to Dellwood and ignored e-mails seeking the reasons for her absence, Ms Richards deemed her to have resigned, terminating her employment.

The union claimed it was an illegal dismissal and took the matter to the labour tribunal.

A hearing took place last May, when Ms Richards insisted that she had not terminated Ms Bailey but had followed the disciplinary rule in the General Order for Teachers 1974 for employees who fail to show up for work without permission.

The panel agreed that the commissioner had the authority to conclude Ms Bailey was absent from work for more than five days and had therefore resigned.

But it said Ms Richards seemed to have given “no consideration” to Ms Bailey’s dual role as a senior union official despite that being “central” to the latter’s decision not to return to the workplace.

The BUT president told the tribunal she believed that her termination was because of her strong criticism of the education department’s Covid-19 policy regarding the reopening of state schools.

She said she did not return to work “in large part” because she was “actively advocating” for the ability of future union officers to be seconded, as set out in the 1981 agreement.

The tribunal’s “final and binding” decision was issued in June but was not made public at the time and the commissioner has not spoken publicly about it since.

But an edited version of the ruling, with the parties’ identities removed, was published on the Government’s website along with other decisions, after an amendment to the Employment Act.

The panel wrote: “Harmonious industrial relations are dependent on give and take and the ability to compromise. Adherence to the letter of the law is not always in the best interests of an organisation or the community.”

The first source told The RoyalGazette that the disputes about Ms Bailey’s job and Dr Santucci’s suspension had consumed much of the union’s time, leaving it largely silent on the Government’s school reform plan and what it might mean for the BUT’s 900-strong membership.

They said they believed that Ms Bailey would be re-elected as president in October but claimed the union was suffering under her leadership, with members not kept well informed.

“The BUT never had any issues, everything was tidy,” the source said.

“We dealt with our stuff, we had foresight and integrity. We handled our business in a very succinct way and now we are not.”

Lawyer Kyle Masters, at Carey Olsen, who is representing the BUT, said the union declined to comment.

The ministry spokeswoman said: “Details of how future secondments of BUT officers will be managed is part of the current collective bargaining agreement negotiations.”

• Click on the PDF under Related Media to read the labour tribunal’s decision.

Download PDF File

22.05.13_Union_Employee_v_Employer_Section_66_TULR_Consolidation_Act_2021_0.pdf