St. George’s, Grenada (CMC) – Grenada’s Public Sector Employees (Pension Fund) Bill 2024, recently passed in the Lower House of Parliament, has sparked controversy as former Attorney General James Bristol claims it violates the nation’s constitution. The Bill, set to be debated in the Upper House on December 27, proposes a contributory pension scheme requiring public sector employees and the government to each contribute three percent of the employee’s salary.
Bristol, who famously challenged and overturned the Pension Disqualification Act of 1983, is sounding the alarm over what he perceives as an attempt to sidestep constitutional protections for public servants.
“You cannot circumvent the constitution by placing someone who is essentially holding a permanent post on a contract of indefinite duration,” Bristol stated. He emphasized that the constitution’s provisions ensure that permanent positions in the public sector are not undermined by temporary or contract-based employment arrangements.
A History of Legal Battles
The Pension Disqualification Act of 1983, enacted during Grenada’s revolutionary government, was later ruled unconstitutional in 2022. The High Court’s decision, delivered by Justice Raulston Glasgow, declared the Act “null and void.” Bristol, who was instrumental in that legal battle, is now drawing parallels between that case and the current Pension Fund Bill, suggesting that similar legal challenges may arise.
“This act is only going to result in more litigation,” Bristol warned. He noted that the government had previously pledged to regularize contract workers in line with constitutional requirements, a promise he believes is being undermined by the new Bill.
The Core Issue: Contract Workers
The Bill has drawn criticism for its handling of contract workers, particularly those in roles traditionally considered permanent, such as nursing staff. According to Bristol, this approach contravenes Section 84 of the constitution, which guarantees pension rights under Section 92.
“For temporary roles—such as covering maternity leave or short-term projects—a contract is appropriate,” Bristol acknowledged. “But for permanent roles, placing workers on indefinite contracts is unconstitutional.”
Financial and Legal Implications
Bristol called on the government to address the issue head-on by “biting the financial bullet” and integrating all eligible workers into the pension scheme without resorting to what he described as “verbiage.” He expressed concern that the government’s current approach could lead to further legal battles, draining resources and prolonging uncertainty for public sector employees.
Next Steps
If approved by the Upper House, the Bill will move to the Office of the Government for final approval and publication in the gazette, with plans to take effect in January 2025. However, with mounting criticism and the likelihood of legal challenges, the path forward for the Pension Fund Bill remains uncertain.
As Grenada prepares for this pivotal decision, the debate underscores the tension between financial pragmatism and constitutional fidelity, leaving public sector employees and policymakers alike awaiting clarity on the future of pension reform.
