Opposition to Jamaica’s controversial agreement with the United States to accept non-national deportees is intensifying, with trade union leaders warning that the island risks becoming a temporary holding ground for undocumented migrants while grappling with its own social and economic challenges.
Veteran trade unionist and president of the Union of Clerical, Administrative and Supervisory Employees (UCASE), Vincent Morrison, has called for the arrangement to be withdrawn, while Jamaica Civil Service Association (JCSA) President Techa Clarke-Griffiths questioned the country’s ability to absorb the consequences of America’s immigration policies.
- Advertisement -
Speaking at an awards ceremony for long-serving civil servants in Manchester last Thursday, Clarke-Griffiths said Jamaica already faces enough domestic difficulties and should not be burdened with additional problems.
“We have enough problems of our own here,” she declared. “We may retire with some persons that we don’t want to retire with that will be overnighting in Jamaica in the near future. We don’t want it. We don’t want it.”
Her concerns were echoed by Morrison, who argued that the Government’s explanations surrounding the agreement have been inconsistent and have created uncertainty among the public.
“When you hear the different statements coming out from different government officials, it’s quite apparent that something is wrong somewhere,” he said.
Morrison maintained that the agreement, which National Security Minister Dr. Horace Chang confirmed was signed last week, should be rescinded. He argued that if the intention is to attract skilled labour, as suggested by Information Minister Dr. Dana Morris Dixon, the arrangement fails to achieve that objective.
“Skilled workers are not going to leave the United States and come to Jamaica,” Morrison said. “The persons they are trying to send to Jamaica under this arrangement are not skilled workers.”
He added that Jamaica’s limited wage structure and the decline of traditional industries such as sugar, bauxite, and aluminium make it unrealistic to expect the country to attract or sustain highly skilled migrants.
“It’s a bad agreement and you can’t foist a bad agreement on the people,” Morrison argued. “Government has the right to manage the country, but when something is patently unfair and unlikely to work, it must be addressed.”
Under the arrangement, Chang said the United States will deport 25 third-country nationals to Jamaica every two weeks. Those individuals may either transit through the island or seek asylum. If more than 10 remain in Jamaica for longer than 30 days, the U.S. is expected to suspend further transfers until the number drops below that threshold.
The issue has become increasingly contentious following reports that Cabinet Minister Audrey Marks initially proposed the arrangement. Marks has denied those claims, while Morris Dixon insisted that what was proposed was a skilled-worker programme and that the matter had been mischaracterised.
Despite those assurances, Morrison believes there is still time for Kingston and Washington to reconsider the deal.
“If I was advising the Government, I would say what you’ve proposed doesn’t make sense, and since there is still time, you need to withdraw it,” he said.
He warned that proceeding with the agreement could carry serious political consequences.
“The Jamaican people will not allow that sort of thing to happen, and I think the Government runs a serious political risk if they allow this to proceed at this time,” Morrison added.
The U.S. Embassy in Kingston has not publicly commented on the growing backlash, but the agreement has emerged as a flashpoint in national debate, with critics questioning both its practical implications and the long-term impact it could have on Jamaica.
