Casa Paola industrial action dispute escalates over union claims Malta

Industrial action at Casa Paola has entered a more complex and sensitive phase as tensions continue between management and the trade union Solidarjetà. The dispute, which centres on allegations of retaliatory conduct and the refusal to enter into a collective agreement, has drawn attention to broader questions about labour relations, employee protections and operational continuity within Malta’s elderly care sector.

While both sides have publicly maintained their respective positions, the situation remains unresolved, with further developments expected following scheduled discussions involving the relevant authorities.

Background to the dispute

The disagreement first became public when Solidarjetà announced industrial action after what it described as unsuccessful attempts to engage management in negotiations for a collective agreement. According to the union, it represents approximately 72 percent of employees at Casa Paola, including nurses, care assistants, health aides and maintenance staff.

The union has argued that its efforts to initiate dialogue were met with resistance, leading to a breakdown in communication. As a result, it issued directives to its members aimed at regulating workloads and reinforcing defined job roles.

At the centre of the dispute are concerns about employee representation and the formalisation of working conditions through a collective agreement. Such agreements typically establish standards relating to wages, scheduling, job responsibilities and dispute resolution mechanisms.

Allegations raised by Solidarjetà

Solidarjetà, through its Secretary Treasurer Gabriel Apap, has alleged that certain employees who joined the union faced adverse consequences. Specifically, the union stated that three workers were “initially” informed that their contracts or work permits would not be renewed.

Following public attention, one of these cases appears to have been reversed, while two others reportedly remain unresolved. The union has framed these developments as indicative of a broader pattern of concern, though it has also continued to emphasise its willingness to engage in dialogue.

The union has maintained that its actions are motivated by the need to safeguard both employee rights and the quality of care provided to residents. In its official communications, it stated that its directives are intended to ensure safe staffing levels and appropriate task allocation.

Management response and denial of claims

Casa Paola is operated by Bajada Group, which owns the facility through Lyons Care Ltd. The group’s founder, Mark Bajada, oversees a portfolio that includes healthcare and hospitality services.

Responding to the allegations, the director of operations for the healthcare and hospitality division, Dylan Bezzina, has firmly denied any suggestion of intimidation or retaliation. He stated that “at no point has management pressured or threatened any employee regarding their right to join a union” and emphasised that the company respects freedom of association.

Bezzina further characterised interactions between management and staff as routine workplace engagement, cautioning against interpreting such exchanges as improper conduct. He also highlighted that employment decisions are based on operational requirements and individual performance.

As an example, he referred to a case in which a union member was transitioned from part time to full time employment, presenting it as evidence that union affiliation does not influence managerial decisions.

Collective bargaining and ongoing discussions

One of the central issues remains the absence of a collective agreement between management and unionised staff. While the company has not provided detailed public reasoning for its position, it has confirmed that its legal representatives are in communication with the Department for Industrial and Employment Relations.

A meeting with a trade dispute arbiter has been scheduled for 23 March, indicating that the matter has progressed to a formal stage within Malta’s industrial relations framework.

Management has stated that it remains committed to resolving the issue through established procedures. However, it has also indicated that the union has continued with industrial action while maintaining its demands.

Nature and scope of industrial action

The industrial action initiated by Solidarjetà has now extended over several days and includes a set of clearly defined directives for union members. These measures do not amount to a full withdrawal of labour but instead regulate the conditions under which staff perform their duties.

Among the directives are refusals to accept unscheduled shifts without adequate notice, to perform tasks outside assigned roles or to take on non essential duties in understaffed situations. Workers have also been instructed not to accept redeployment across different floors of the facility.

The union has stated that these measures are designed to maintain safe working conditions while ensuring that essential care services continue without disruption. It has consistently emphasised that resident welfare remains a priority.

Impact on residents and families

According to Solidarjetà, feedback from residents and their families has been largely supportive. The union has reported that many have expressed concern for staff welfare and have inquired about ways to offer assistance.

At the same time, union representatives have stressed that the industrial action has been carefully structured to minimise any adverse impact on residents. Essential services continue to be delivered and staff remain present in their roles, albeit under modified conditions.

Management has not publicly detailed any operational challenges arising from the situation but has reiterated its commitment to maintaining service standards.

Legal and regulatory considerations

The involvement of the Department for Industrial and Employment Relations reflects the formal nature of the dispute. In Malta, industrial relations are governed by a framework that encourages negotiation and conciliation, with arbitration available when parties cannot reach agreement.

Both the union and management have indicated their willingness to engage within this framework, although their respective accounts differ regarding the extent and timing of such engagement.

From a legal perspective, issues such as freedom of association, fair employment practices and the right to collective bargaining are central to the case. However, any determination of compliance or breach would depend on a detailed examination by the competent authorities.

Union position on next steps

Solidarjetà has stated that it remains open to dialogue but has set out clear conditions for suspending its industrial directives. These include the reinstatement of affected workers and a commitment from management to enter into good faith negotiations on a collective agreement.

Gabriel Apap has indicated that union members are adhering closely to the directives while continuing to prioritise resident care. He also noted that the union is prepared to escalate action, including the possibility of a strike, if necessary.

At present, the union’s position appears firm, though it has reiterated its preference for a negotiated resolution.

Management outlook and response strategy

From management’s perspective, the focus remains on maintaining operations and engaging with the formal dispute resolution process. The company has emphasised that it respects the industrial relations system and is participating in scheduled discussions.

While rejecting the union’s allegations, management has not ruled out the possibility of dialogue. Its statements suggest a preference for resolving differences through established institutional channels rather than public exchanges.

The upcoming meeting with the trade dispute arbiter may provide an opportunity for both sides to clarify positions and explore potential compromises.

Broader implications for the sector

The dispute at Casa Paola highlights broader challenges within the elderly care sector, particularly in relation to staffing, working conditions and employee representation. As demand for care services continues to grow, the importance of stable labour relations becomes increasingly significant.

Situations such as this underscore the need for clear communication and mutual understanding between employers and employees. They also illustrate the role of regulatory bodies in facilitating fair and balanced outcomes.

While the immediate focus remains on resolving the current dispute, its outcome may have implications for similar facilities and labour practices across the sector.

Conclusion

The industrial action at Casa Paola represents a complex labour relations issue involving competing claims and differing interpretations of workplace events. On one side, Solidarjetà has raised concerns about employee treatment and the need for formalised agreements. On the other, management has firmly denied allegations of misconduct and has emphasised its adherence to legal standards and operational requirements.

At this stage, the matter remains unresolved, with both parties maintaining their positions while engaging with formal dispute resolution mechanisms. The scheduled discussions with the relevant authorities may prove decisive in shaping the next phase of the process.

Ultimately, a sustainable resolution will likely depend on constructive dialogue, mutual concessions and a shared commitment to both employee welfare and resident care. As the situation evolves, it will continue to be closely observed within Malta’s industrial and healthcare communities.

FAQs

What is the main issue at Casa Paola?
The dispute centres on union recognition, alleged treatment of employees and the absence of a collective agreement between staff and management.

Who represents the workers involved?
The workers are represented by the trade union Solidarjetà, which claims to represent a majority of staff.

What allegations has the union made?
The union has alleged that some employees faced adverse consequences after joining, including concerns about contract renewals.

How has management responded?
Management has denied all allegations of intimidation and stated that it respects employees’ legal rights.

What kind of industrial action is taking place?
Workers are following directives that limit certain duties rather than engaging in a full strike.

Are residents affected by the situation?
Both sides indicate that essential services are continuing and efforts are being made to minimise any impact on residents.

Is there a collective agreement in place?
No collective agreement currently exists between the unionised workers and management.

What role does the government play?
The Department for Industrial and Employment Relations is involved in facilitating discussions and dispute resolution.

Could the situation escalate further?
The union has indicated that further action, including a strike, remains possible if no resolution is reached.

What is the next step in the process?
A meeting with a trade dispute arbiter is scheduled, which may help move the situation toward a resolution.