Government Statement: Closure of Berger Paints

On 24 February 2026, Berger Paints Barbados Ltd (BPBL) announced that it would be closing down on 24 April 2026.

On 28 February 2026, the Government published a statement about the unfortunate closure of BPBL. The statement is available at the Government Information Service’s website.

The Labour Minister stated that - 

“Good practice and legal rulings suggest and mandate that the consultation must be meaningful. I am not sure how meaningful consultation can be if a decision has already been made and if it appears to be written in stone. On the legal side, therefore, my concern is that the announcement may tarnish the ability of the company and the trade union representing the workers to have meaningful consultations.” 

Employment Rights Act 2012

BPBL has no legal obligation to undertake redundancy consultation - before it made a final decision to close down its business. Because the consultation requirements set out in section 31 of the Employment Rights Act 2012 (ERA) does not address a situation where an employer is closing down.

For example, section 31 of the ERA does not state that an employer must consult about the ways of avoiding or reducing redundancy dismissals.  If section 31 of the ERA did so - it would follow that consulting about preventing the closure of BPBL - would be a way of avoiding or reducing redundancy dismissals.

Hence, the author would propose that section 31 of the ERA should be amended to state that an employer must consult about the ways of avoiding or reducing redundancy dismissals.

Section 31 of the ERA does not state or imply that an employer must undertake redundancy consultation - before the employer makes a final decision to close down its business¹. An employer is only required to comply with section 31(1) of the ERA, in order, for a redundancy dismissal to be fair.  

 

Case Law

The author is unaware of any case law in relation to section 31 of the ERA that ruled that an employer must undertake redundancy consultation - before the employer makes a final decision to close down its business. The Government did not quote any case law to support its statement.

Good Practice

An employer has no obligation to follow any practice that the Government considers to be good practice. And the definition of good practice will vary from one employer to another employer². However, the author agrees with the Government that redundancy consultation must be meaningful (and genuine).

See the news item entitled Redundancy Consultation. 

Also see Why Bother Consulting About Redundancies? in the news item entitled CCJ Reduces Award for Unfair Dismissal.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. In the case of BAMC v Wickham (CA), the Court of Appeal (at paragraph 49) stated that - 

"Foremost , the language of the ERA is clear and unambiguous, needing no assistance from foreign jurisprudence for clarification. In other words, the provisions in section 31(4)(b) and (6) require no exogenous gloss for us to ascertain their meaning." 

2. BPBL’s press release about its closure stated that “Beyond the regulatory requirements, Berger Paints Barbados is providing additional support for its employees”. For example, BPBL would provide its “employees with resume writing support and career-planning guidance”. Such additional support for BPBL’s employees may be considered as good practice.

Minimum Wage: Where is the Law About a Trainee's Pay?

A person must be an employee¹ in order to be entitled to the minimum wage (MW).

In 2025, the Government agreed to the Minimum Wage Board's recommendation that 85% of the MW should be paid to persons on certain training programmes that do not exceed three months.

But where is the law that implements the recommendation? Such a law is not mentioned in any Minimum Wage Order (MWO). Is the law mentioned in an amendment to the Minimum Wage Act 2017 (MWA) or any other labour law? 

Please note that it is unlawful to pay 85% of the MW to an employee¹ - if there is no legal basis for doing so.

MW increased by 2% on 21 January 2026

On 21 January 2026, the hourly rate of the MW increased by 2% from $10.50 to $10.71². History has proven that it is a futile exercise to object to any increase of the MW or a MWO - as per section 7 of the MWA.

Statutory Paternity Leave/Pay

The Family Leave Act 2025 was published in October 2025 - even though the Government announced that the Act would come into force on 1 June 2025. See the comments below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. The definition of an employee can be found in section 2 of the Minimum Wage Act 2017 (MWA). The MW applies to an hourly-paid employee. But the MWA is silent about other types of work, e.g. piecework, where an employee is not hourly-paid.

2. The Minimum Wage (National and Sectoral Minimum Wage) Order 2026 (SI 2026/43). 

Disability Discrimination (Barbados)

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2025 (RPDA) came into force on 6 February 2025. However, the Employment (Prevention of Discrimination) Act 2020

(E(PD)A) has provided discrimination rights for persons with disabilities in relation to their employment from 21 September 2020. For example, under section 7 of the E(PD)A, an employer has a legal duty to make a reasonable adjustment for a person with a disability in relation to their employment.

Surprisingly, there is a significant difference between the statutory definitions of a disability. Under the RPDA, a disability (e.g. a mental disability) must be "certified by a registered medical practitioner". But, under E(PD)A, a disability (e.g. a mental disability) does not have to be certified by a registered medical practitioner.

Transgender Discrimination (Barbados)

In the case of Hoffmann v Court Caribbean Law Practice, the Employment Rights Tribunal confirmed that it is not automatically unfair to dismiss an employee due to their transgender under section 30 of the Employment Rights Act 2012.

Also see the news item entitled Additional Award for Automatic Unfair Dismissal.

Please note that the Employment (Prevention of Discrimination) Act 2020

(E(PD)A) does not apply to transgender discrimination. See section 3(2) of the E(PD)A.

The Labour Clauses (Concessions) Act 2024

Labour Clause 

Under section 4(1)(a) of the Labour Clauses (Concessions) Act 2024 (LC(C)A) - the Government may suspend or revoke a concession (e.g. a tax exemption) that has been granted to an employer - if the employer has failed to comply with a labour clause - in the 2nd Schedule of the LC(C)A) 2024. For example, the 6th labour clause states that - 

"6. An employer shall recognize the freedom of their employees to be members of a registered trade union and recognize their right to bargain collectively."

The 6th labour clause is not complemented by trade union recognition/derecognition legislation¹.

As at 1 March 2026 - the author is unaware of any concession being suspended or revoked from an employer - due to the employer's failure to comply with a labour clause.

Labour Law

The Government may also suspend or revoke a concession (e.g. a tax exemption) that has been granted to an employer - if the employer has failed to comply with a labour law, e.g. the Employment Rights Act 2012 (ERA). See section 4(1)(b) and the 3rd Schedule of the LC(C)A 2024.

The definition of a concession can be found in section 2 of the LC(C)A 2024.

As at 1 March 2026 - the author is unaware of any concession being suspended or revoked from an employer - due to the employer's failure to comply with a labour law. 

Out-of-Court Settlements

The LC(C)A 2024 may provide an incentive for an employer to reach an out-of-court settlement for a labour clause/law claim.  If one assumes, e.g. in the case of an unfair dismissal claim (UDC), that a Court must rule that the employer has failed to comply with the ERA 2012 - in order for a concession to be suspended or revoked. See section 2.5.2 Litigation or Out-of-Court Settlement? in the topic entitled Disciplinary Procedures (Barbados).

An employer may argue that the Government's suspension or revocation of a concession is an abuse of power - if the suspension or revocation is not based on a Court's ruling. Because only a Court has the legal authority to determine - whether or not an employer has failed to comply with the ERA 2012, e.g. whether a dismissal is unfair.

How will the LC(C)A 2024 Operate in Practice?
 
It is unknown how the LC(C)A 2024 will operate in practice. For example, if one assumes that a Court must rule that an employer has failed to comply with the ERA 2012 - in order for a concession to be suspended or revoked. Will the Government suspend or revoke a concession - 

• After the Employment Rights Tribunal (or as the case may be after the Court of Appeal or the Caribbean Court of Justice) has ruled that an employer has failed to comply with the ERA 2012?
• Within a certain time-limit (e.g. one year) after a Court has ruled that an employer has failed to comply with the ERA 2012?

Hopefully, the practical operation of the LC(C)A 2024 will be explained by regulations made under section 6 of the LC(C)A 2024.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Further information about trade union recognition can be found on the Ministry of Labour's website.