GUCB employees defer stir

GUCB employees defer stir
HERALD REPORTER
PANJIM, MARCH 29
The employees and officers’ union of crisis-hit Goa Urban Cooperative Bank (GUCB) today tried to salvage the institution from further damage by withholding their indefinite strike for next deadline.
The call for the indefinite strike, to begin from this morning, was deferred after seven out of eight directors tendered their resignation on Friday.
The board of directors led by Vishnoo Naik put in the papers claiming that they and some non-striking employees were being threatened by the labour union members.
“We are not prepared to take threat culture. It’s impossible to run the bank in such a situation,” Naik, who has been holding reigns of this bank for last 30 years, told Herald this evening.
The union on the other hand softened their stand turning their indefinite strike into a day long token strike and charting another deadline of May 3 for the management to fulfill their demands.
Goa Urban Cooperative Bank Employees Union and Goa Urban Cooperative Bank Officers Association had given a joint call for indefinite strike from today that would have crippled the functioning of this bank, which has 14 branches across the state.
The union members have been demanding revision in their wages with effect from 2003 while the management is firm that the revision could be considered only from 2007.
“They had a settlement in 2007 and arrears from 2003 till that day were paid to them. Now they are refusing to accept that settlement and wants new one beginning from 2003, which is not acceptable,” Naik claimed. Union leaders however said that the management has failed to sign two wage settlements.
The en-mass resignations of seven directors, including Naik, came as a sudden jolt for the bank, which has witnessed such crisis for the first time.
 Naik said that all the directors excluding Dr Anil Gaunekar had resigned. “Now it’s for the state government to decide the future of bank,” he added.
The chairman said that the en-mass resignations have become contentious for the state government as the new cooperative societies Act does not allow administrator to be appointed on cooperative bank in such a situation.
The union general secretary Archana Kare today told reporters that the union is concerned about the fate of bank and hence withdrew the indefinite strike till May 03.
“We have issued a fresh deadline and have decided to continue the fight for our rights till we get them,” she said.
 Meanwhile, Rui Ferreira in his capacity as a shareholder, depositor and son of the founder chairman of GUCB, has strongly appealed to the Government of Goa to accept the resignation and dissolve the Board of Directors of the GUCB under the provisions of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 and to immediately appoint an Administrator/s to run the affairs of GUCB smoothly as a financial institution engaged in banking business cannot be kept headless under the Negotiable Instruments Act and without managerial and supervisory control.
Chairman Vishnoo Anant Naik and Board of Directors have abdicated their responsibility by submitting their resignation “to emotionally blackmail the employees and mislead the members of the public”, Ferreira alleged in a press note issued here.
He recalled that the incumbent Chairman Vishnoo Naik was dismissed on 11-6-1984 by the then Pratapsingh Rane- led Government of Goa. The then Board of Directors headed by Vishnoo Naik was dismissed on the ground of being negligent in the performance of duties imposed under the Act, Rules and the Bye-law and that they committed acts prejudicial to the interests of the shareholders.
The dismissal order which was challenged by Vishnoo Naik was upheld by the then Secretary Co-operation, Government of Goa Dr S K Gandhe after which he filed a Writ Petition which was ultimately dismissed by the High Court with interesting observations including:
 ‘Moreover it is a betrayal of the members who want the financial activities of the bank to be governed not by one man but by majority of Board of Directors. The Registrar was, therefore, justified in saying the Board of Directors was reduced to a non-entity and that the Chairman exercised unfettered and unbridled powers.