Dear Editor,
With respect to the voice who was reported to have made a rather ‘guttered’ response to Mr Yesu Persaud’s utterance regarding political interventions in the management of GuySuCo, one can only come to the conclusion that the respondent was either a rehired retiree, who was out of touch with the realities of the organisation’s decision-making structure, or was much too reluctant to apprehend what managers, and others in the corporation, readily attest to as an ongoing experience – ranging from appointments, promotions, terminations; not to mention, his/her own lauded ‘turnaround’ which seems incapable of ‘turning up’ or ‘forward.’
This instinctive rush to defend, at all unnecessary costs, reflects the endemic state of denial in which compliant (and perhaps suppliant) stakeholders of whatever kind, have become almost programmed to inhabit. It is a curious contradiction wherein exists a hypersensitivity to criticism derived from easily observable factual behaviours and products, and which is widely shared – as in this case, the perception of Mr Yesu Persaud.
Mr/Ms GuySuCo would have done greater justice to the organisation by keeping silent, and, preferably, indulging in a more deliberate exercise of distinguishing the real environment from the virtual; and so proceeding to set a model of reconstructed integrity that can be emulated.
Yours faithfully,
(Name and address provided)