The windscreens of cars and trucks parked on Queen Street were lined with fliers at lunch time today, calling on residents to boycott KFC.Bermuda Industrial Union President Chris Furbert was not phased by the long lines inside KFC on one of the busiest days of the week for the fast food eatery.The flier carrying six bullet points notes that “after 40 years of a good working relationship with KFC, management now says the benefits that the workers have earned will be reversed”.It also states: “The Candadian Controller/Director of KFC is ignoring the industrial relations process in Bermuda by denying workers their fundamental rights at work.”But the fourth point listed on the flyer points up the untimely death of a KFC employee who was accused of abusing sick leave. “An employee calls in sick, presents a doctor's certificate. Management states ‘it was abuse of sick leave', a few weeks later the employee died.”In an interview with The Royal Gazette, Mr Furbert said: “Today it's KFC, tomorrow it will be employees who work for other companies. If you allow KFC to do this then it sets a precedent setting for the rest of the employers in this country and that's dangerous.“If you look at all the benefits that KFC employees enjoy right now, KFC has the intention of taking them backwards and that's what the BIU is here to fight against.”When asked how he felt about the long lines inside KFC at lunchtime today, Mr Furbert said: “They probably haven't heard the news yet, and we recognise that until the information gets out there, some people don't know that we've asked for this boycott.“We're going to do what we can to get the information out to the public to support the boycott. This is not about Chris Furbert trying to keep his members.“We're here to protect the rights of the workers, KFC management is trying to take away the rights that we've negotiated for KFC workers for just about 40 years now.”The union is calling on Island residents to boycott KFC (Bermuda) Limited in a bid to force the fast food restaurant to reinstate a collective bargaining agreement.KFC management is insisting that a collective bargaining agreement with the union has been terminated, union President Chris Furbert explained to the news media yesterday, and it has refused the union's request to subject their dispute to arbitration.But the company told The Royal Gazette that they are well within their rights to terminate their agreement as it contained a specific provision allowing them to do so, and that a boycott of their business could lead to job losses.“Today is a sad day for industrial relations,” said Mr Furbert at a press conference yesterday.KFC had given notice in February 2011 to modify the collective bargaining agreement but then seven months later said they were terminating the agreement, Mr Furbert said.KFC has retained law firm Wakefield and Quin which has advised the company that the differences between the parties do not qualify as a labour dispute as defined by the law, and cannot lawfully be sent to arbitration.The company's position is that there is no collective bargaining agreement, while the union says that KFC's termination of the agreement was invalid.Both the BIU and the Department of Labour have suggested arbitration as a way to resolve the dispute.But KFC's lawyers have indicated, in a letter provided to the media by Mr Furbert, that should the Economy Minister refer the matter to arbitration, the decision could be challenged in Supreme Court.The BIU warned KFC to reinstate the agreement by 3pm today or face a boycott. But the deadline passed without response from the company, Mr Furbert reported.“It is a sad day in the history of this country when an employer can unilaterally cancel an agreement after giving notice to modify the agreement,” he added.“If this employer is allowed to get away with it, I believe other employers will try to do the same sort of thing and it makes a complete mockery of the industrial relations system in this country.”About 30 employees, full and part-time, are involved.Mr Furbert was asked if he had any concerns that the boycott action could have adverse economic effects on the workers.“The intention here is not to close down KFC, it is to get KFC management and the Board and Wakefield and Quin to understand what labour relations means in this country,” Mr Furbert said.“If the workers decide they want to decertify the BIU, then you can go ahead and cancel that agreement. But the workers have not made that decision.”Mr Furbert said that KFC was in violation of the Island's labour laws but it was Government's responsibility, not the BIU's to take legal action against KFC.“We will go to arbitration under the condition that the agreement will be reinstated fully,” Mr Furbert said.He added: “The boycott will last until KFC decides to reinstate the collective bargaining agreement with the BIU.”Mr Furbert indicated that the BIU was hoping to resolve the dispute without escalation. But he added if the parties did not come together, “that's a path for destruction”.“If this process that KFC has proposed, to cancel the agreement, is allowed to continue, that brings into question all the 60 odd years of history that the BIU has in this country of working with employers in industrial relations, of putting together collective bargaining agreements. You might as well just start over,” Mr Furbert added.“Right now people enjoy benefits like vacation leave, sick leave because of what the BIU has been able to set the standard for the working class people of this country for over 60 years now.“This is something our general membership needs to pay attention to and certainly the general public needs to pay attention to.”Asked for the company's reaction to the latest development, company Director Jason Benevides said that the call belied the union's claims to be a social partner.“The BIU has instead chosen to resort to bully tactics which can serve no other purpose other than to try and harm KFC's business,” he said.“Should the BIU be successful in encouraging a boycott of KFC, that action will only serve to damage the employment prospects for KFC's employees who the BIU purports to represent.Mr Benevides added that the company was proud of the fact that they had managed to stay in business despite declining sales and net losses last year without laying off any of its predominantly Bermudian workforce.“KFC's continuing ability to remain in operation and secure stable jobs for our staff is dependent on the continued support of our customers,” he added.“We certainly hope that our customers will continue to treat themselves to the affordable, quality meals that our mostly Bermudian staff has provided to Bermuda for many years.”Mr Benevides also refuted Mr Furbert's assertion that the company had not responded to its boycott threat and provided their response, dated April 11, to The Royal Gazette.The letter, from company Board Chairman Donald Lines, warns Mr Furbert that a boycott would likely negatively affect the staff.“Such action could ultimately result in the employees losing their jobs altogether for in the event we continue to be unprofitable the Board may have no alternative but to close the store,” the letter states.And it says the company would be willing to discuss re-employing someone who was dismissed for serious misconduct should a new the parties hold “productive discussions” about a new agreement.At yesterday's press conference Mr Furbert said categorically that no response had been received from the company, but that he had been asked at the “eleventh hour” to hold off on the boycott threat by Labour Relations Officer Glenn Fubler who has been mediating the dispute.Mr Benevides also confirmed the company's position that it recognised that the BIU was the bargaining agent for its workers.But, he said, the termination provision in their agreement was freely negotiated and the company was seeking a new agreement “which treats employees fairly while also recognising the economic realities in which KFC operates, and which provides a sustainable cost structure for the company”.He added: “It can only be disingenuous of the BIU to now claim that a freely negotiated provision of an agreement to which the BIU was a signatory cannot be utilised just because it does not suit the BIU's present purpose.”The company, he continued, “has never attempted to decertify the BIU as the workers' bargaining agent as the BIU has repeatedly yet erroneously claimed”.