Last week, I broke the news that the Ghana Medical Association (GMA) would not take part in organised labour’s anti-galamsey strike.
My sources told me that the GMA President, Dr. Frank Serebour, was against the strike, but some executive members were fighting it.
On Tuesday, the GMA President single-handedly signed a statement announcing the association’s departure from organised labour’s position.
I said “single-handedly” because if you look at these five GMA Press releases I have shared, all four previous ones were co-signed by the President and General Secretary of the association.
Only the anti-galamsey press statement was signed by the President alone.
Apart from the petition from a GMA member that says Dr. Frank Serebour acted alone on the association’s position on the strike, highly placed sources in the GMA have told me that there was no meeting among the executives that discussed or agreed on what the President said.
If the claim that medical doctors cannot take part in the strike because of the critical nature of their work is anything to go by, then what happened in similar strikes in the past?
Or does the GMA only realise the critical nature of their work when the reason for striking is national interest and not their parochial interest?
If the GMA refuses to strike against galamsey, will they have the public’s support if they strike or intend to strike in the future for their condition of service?
Should the GMA not be leading organised labour, considering the dire health challenges posed by illegal mining in Ghana?
And is it not strange that the GMA President, like other individual members of organised labour kicking against the strike, are all coming from the stronghold of the governing NPP?
ALSO READ: