{"id":83935,"date":"2026-02-26T19:13:53","date_gmt":"2026-02-27T01:13:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.greaterbelize.com\/?p=83935"},"modified":"2026-02-26T19:13:53","modified_gmt":"2026-02-27T01:13:53","slug":"btl-counters-union-insists-severance-dispute-is-resolved","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greaterbelize.com\/btl-counters-union-insists-severance-dispute-is-resolved\/","title":{"rendered":"BTL Counters Union, Insists Severance Dispute Is Resolved"},"content":{"rendered":"

Belize Telemedia Limited is taking a strong stance, trying to put some distance between itself and the growing frustration coming from the Belize Communications Workers for Justice. The BCWJ has accused the company of dragging its feet<\/a>, and acting in bad faith, on long\u2011standing severance claims. But today, BTL countered that narrative. At a press conference, company officials said they\u2019ve paid every cent ordered by the Caribbean Court of Justice, stressing that all court\u2011mandated severance payments are now fully settled. And they\u2019re not stopping there. According to BTL, additional payouts for former employees who qualify under Section 183 of the Labour Act are already in the pipeline and will be processed. The company says it\u2019s following the law, and it\u2019s being transparent about it. Responding directly to remarks from the BCWJ earlier this week, BTL\u2019s Internal Legal Counsel, Kileru Awich, explained that the severance issue has shifted significantly over the last four months. He suggested that what\u2019s happening now is part of a more complex, evolving process, not the stonewalling the former employees claims.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Kileru

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Kileru Awich<\/p><\/div>\n

Kileru Awich, Internal Legal Counsel, Belize Telemedia Limited<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cYou have to understand that this matter of severance has evolved significantly between November and February. There was the company’s initial position, which was that we are going to satisfy severance obligations for those who are within the 6-year limitation period. And if you are outside of the six-year limitation period, the company would not voluntarily pay any severance. Now, the six percent that was paid to those former employees who left within six years, that six was arrived at because the company at that point was not contemplating paying beyond the six-year. Now, you have to appreciate that the company’s position has changed since then, and the company is now going to pay severance payments to those former employees who left within 6 years prior. So the considerations are now very different in terms of interest, because the company has agreed to settle obligations which it has been advised are not statue barred. And then I also need to add that interest is not as of right. This interest which litigants get comes from statutory, from the Senior Courts Act, and you have to plead it. You plead it in your claim at the court, and you succeed in your claim, and the court determines your interest under that provision of the Senior Courts Act. So the company paying interest now is actually the company paying beyond what it is required to pay, because these matters have not gone to court. Only the matter of Erven Marin and his fellow litigants went to court. And that gives you full context as to why.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"Interest Standoff Freezes BTL\u2013Union Negotiations<\/strong><\/h5>\n

 <\/p>\n

Negotiations between Belize Telemedia Limited and the Belize Communications Workers for Justice<\/a> have stalled, as both sides dig in over whether interest should apply to outstanding severance payments. While BCWJ accuses the company of delaying and acting in bad faith, BTL insists it has already settled all court\u2011ordered payouts and is prepared to process additional claims under Section 183 of the Labour Act. The sticking point now is interest: the union wants terms reflecting what a court might award, but BTL argues that any settlement outside the courtroom requires give\u2011and\u2011take. According to Chief Human Resource Officer Kendra Santos, the company is willing to pay interest beginning from the November 2025 benchmark set out in the CCJ ruling, an offer BTL says goes beyond its legal obligations, given how the severance issue has evolved in recent months.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Kendra

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kendra Santos<\/p><\/div>\n

Kendra Santos, Chief Human Resource Officer, Belize Telemedia<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cSo if we’re both saying, we’re talking and we’re both saying we don’t want to go to court, the expectation that we will give and you will get everything that you believe you should get if you go to court cannot be the premise that we’re talking, in our view. You can’t think that you will end up getting everything that you believe you would get if you go to court. If it is that we’re talking outside of court and we want to settle, both parties have to agree to get something and to give up something. That’s the spirit in which we approach the discussions. So, your question regarding interest, we had a lot discussion around whether the interest awarded by the court, if you go to court, is applicable or not. We even conceded to the fact that it’s not that interest that’s applicable on the table, the company’s prepared to pay the interest, given that if you want to talk about cost of living adjustment or the fact that there is some premium, my words, premium, if you will, to be given on these monies because they were not paid at the time it was due. And so the company is saying, well, if it is that your argument is that you only became aware of how this severance payment really should be made once and for all, notwithstanding that you’ve asked for years outside of court, but that the CCJ judgment has clarified it for all and sundry, then a good marker to start the interest, because you say I could not have reasonably known that I needed to claim within six years of leaving, I only knew that this was supposed to be the case, November 2025. The company’s prepared to pay the interest from November 2025, benchmarking the six percent against interest that was awarded for those who actually went to court and the court in its own discretion awarded that six percent for them as part of the judgment, right?\u201d\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

BTL Rejects Bad\u2011Faith Claim as Talks Stall<\/strong><\/h5>\n

 <\/p>\n

As severance negotiations between Belize Telemedia Limited and the Belize Communications Workers for Justice remain frozen over an interest dispute, BTL is also refuting claims that it acted in bad faith. The company maintains it never walked away from the table and says it continued improving its offers even as talks grew tense. According to Chief Human Resource Officer Kendra Santos, the union\u2019s approach at their last meeting lacked the professionalism needed for productive dialogue. BTL is now urging former employees to contact the company directly, arguing that they can still access their severance outside of BCWJ\u2019s negotiation process.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Kendra

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kendra Santos<\/p><\/div>\n

Kendra Santos, Chief Human Resource Officer, Belize Telemedia<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI will put it mildly to say that the manner in which we were engaged this last time around, this second meeting, the tone, the spirit, the lack of professional expertise as we would want to see it, was what we were engaged with. And we recognize that for those two reasons, being so far apart, you’re trying to get the six percent and everything that comes with a court judgment, along with the approach, is not the spirit in which we can reasonably negotiate. And that is why, in our view, for those two reasons, it broke down. And why we’re here today, to tell everyone in Belize that the company wants to move forward without delay and settle with everybody in the same manner. So whether you are being represented by BCWJ, whether you write on your own to the mailbox, whether you come to an attorney, whatever it is, BTL’s board has approved that you want to pay and we want to pay in this manner and we think it’s reasonable to give the severance and interest from November 2025, when the judgment was handed down, to whenever we actually got a check for persons.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Reporter<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWould you, the other side has accused you all of negotiating in bad faith.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Kendra Santos<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWhat would be your response to that? The response to that is, we do not agree with terminologies, because we watch the news. We don’t agree with terminologies of us low-balling and in bad faith. So us, bad faith would have been if we weren’t prepared to sit at the table in the first place, if we were not making improved positions, not once did we reduce our position, not once did we withdraw from the table, not once did we get up from the table and walk away.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

And tonight, BTL says it\u2019s ready to move forward, urging former employees to reach out directly as it maintains the breakdown in talks had more to do with tone and approach than any unwillingness to negotiate.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Attention readers: This online newscast is a direct transcript of our evening television broadcast. When speakers use Kriol, we have carefully rendered their words using a standard spelling system.<\/h6>\n

 <\/p>\n

Watch the full newscast here:<\/h4>\n

 <\/p>\n